Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Melanoma: HELP
Articles by Caroline Dutriaux
Based on 19 articles published since 2008
||||

Between 2008 and 2019, C. Dutriaux wrote the following 19 articles about Melanoma.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Guideline [Treatment of patients with inoperable stage III or stage IV melanoma. Société française de dermatologie]. 2018

Guillot, B / Charles, J / Jeudy, G / Cupissol, D / Dupuy, A / Dutriaux, C / Gangloff, D / Magne, N / Mirabel, X / M'Sadek, A / Pracht, M / Sichel, C / Do Outeiro, G. ·Département de dermatologie, hôpital Saint-Éloi, CHU de Montpellier, 34295 Montpellier, France. Electronic address: b-guillot@chu-montpellier.fr. · CHU de Grenoble, 38700 Grenoble, France. · CHU de Dijon, 21000 Dijon, France. · Institut du Cancer de Montpellier, 34298 Montpellier, France. · CHU de Rennes, 35000 Rennes, France. · CHU de Bordeaux, 33000 Bordeaux, France. · Institut universitaire du cancer de Toulouse, 31100 Toulouse, France. · Institut de cancérologie de la Loire, 42270 Saint-Priest-en-Jarez, France. · Centre Oscar-Lambret, 59000 Lille, France. · Centre Eugène-Marquis, 35000 Rennes, France. · 13470 Carnoux en Provence, France. · Institut national du cancer de Boulogne-Billancourt, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France. ·Ann Dermatol Venereol · Pubmed #29703640.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

2 Clinical Trial Encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma (COLUMBUS): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. 2018

Dummer, Reinhard / Ascierto, Paolo A / Gogas, Helen J / Arance, Ana / Mandala, Mario / Liszkay, Gabriella / Garbe, Claus / Schadendorf, Dirk / Krajsova, Ivana / Gutzmer, Ralf / Chiarion-Sileni, Vanna / Dutriaux, Caroline / de Groot, Jan Willem B / Yamazaki, Naoya / Loquai, Carmen / Moutouh-de Parseval, Laure A / Pickard, Michael D / Sandor, Victor / Robert, Caroline / Flaherty, Keith T. ·Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zürich Skin Cancer Center, Zürich, Switzerland. Electronic address: reinhard.dummer@usz.ch. · Melanoma Unit, Cancer Immunotherapy and Innovative Therapies, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione Pascale, Naples, Italy. · Department of Internal Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Laikon Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Oncology and Haematology, Papa Giovanni XXIII Cancer Center Hospital, Bergamo, Italy. · Department of Dermatology, National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary. · Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tüebingen, Tüebingen, Germany. · Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of Dermato-oncology, University Hospital Prague, Charles University First Medical Faculty, Prague, Czech Republic. · Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Skin Cancer Center Hannover, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. · Melanoma Cancer Unit, Oncology Institute of Veneto IRCCS, Padua, Italy. · Department of Oncologic Dermatology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Hôpital Saint-André, Bordeaux, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, Isala, Zwolle, Netherlands. · Department of Dermatologic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. · Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany. · Translational Clinical Oncology, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland. · Array BioPharma, Boulder, CO, USA. · Service of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Paris-Sud University, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. · Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #29573941.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Combined BRAF-MEK inhibitor therapy is the standard of care for BRAF METHODS: COLUMBUS was conducted as a two-part, randomised, open-label phase 3 study at 162 hospitals in 28 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had histologically confirmed locally advanced (American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV), unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, or unknown primary melanoma; a BRAF FINDINGS: Between Dec 30, 2013, and April 10, 2015, 577 of 1345 screened patients were randomly assigned to either the encorafenib plus binimetinib group (n=192), the encorafenib group (n=194), or the vemurafenib group (n=191). With a median follow-up of 16·6 months (95% CI 14·8-16·9), median progression-free survival was 14·9 months (95% CI 11·0-18·5) in the encorafenib plus binimetinib group and 7·3 months (5·6-8·2) in the vemurafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·54, 95% CI 0·41-0·71; two-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events seen in more than 5% of patients in the encorafenib plus binimetinib group were increased γ-glutamyltransferase (18 [9%] of 192 patients), increased creatine phosphokinase (13 [7%]), and hypertension (11 [6%]); in the encorafenib group they were palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (26 [14%] of 192 patients), myalgia (19 [10%]), and arthralgia (18 [9%]); and in the vemurafenib group it was arthralgia (11 [6%] of 186 patients). There were no treatment-related deaths except for one death in the combination group, which was considered possibly related to treatment by the investigator. INTERPRETATION: Encorafenib plus binimetinib and encorafenib monotherapy showed favourable efficacy compared with vemurafenib. Overall, encorafenib plus binimetinib appears to have an improved tolerability profile compared with encorafenib or vemurafenib. Encorafenib plus binimetinib could represent a new treatment option for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma. FUNDING: Array BioPharma, Novartis.

3 Clinical Trial Health-related quality of life impact of cobimetinib in combination with vemurafenib in patients with advanced or metastatic BRAF 2018

Dréno, Brigitte / Ascierto, Paolo A / Atkinson, Victoria / Liszkay, Gabriella / Maio, Michele / Mandalà, Mario / Demidov, Lev / Stroyakovskiy, Daniil / Thomas, Luc / de la Cruz-Merino, Luis / Dutriaux, Caroline / Garbe, Claus / Bartley, Karen / Karagiannis, Thomas / Chang, Ilsung / Rooney, Isabelle / Koralek, Daniel O / Larkin, James / McArthur, Grant A / Ribas, Antoni. ·Department of Dermato Cancerology, Nantes University, Nantes 44093, France. · Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples 80131, Italy. · Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia. · National Institute of Oncology, Budapest 1122, Hungary. · Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena 53100, Italy. · Department of Oncology and Haematology, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo 24127, Italy. · N. N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow 115478, Russia. · Moscow City Oncology Hospital 62, Krasnogorsk 14301, Russia. · Service de Dermatologie, Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, Pierre-Bénite 69495, France. · Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Seville 41009, Spain. · Hôpital Saint André, Bordeaux 33075, France. · Department of Dermatology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen 72074, Germany. · Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA 94080, USA. · The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK. · Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, VIC 3002, Australia. · University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia. · Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. ·Br J Cancer · Pubmed #29438370.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: In the coBRIM study, cobimetinib plus vemurafenib (C+V) significantly improved survival outcomes vs placebo and vemurafenib (P+V) in patients with advanced/metastatic BRAF METHODS: Patients completing the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) at baseline and ⩾1 time point thereafter constituted the analysis population. Change from baseline ⩾10 points was considered clinically meaningful. RESULTS: Mean baseline scores for all QLQ-C30 domains were similar between arms. Most on-treatment scores for QLQ-C30 domains were also comparable between arms. A transient deterioration in role function in cycle 1 day 15 (C1D15; -14.7 points) in the P+V arm and improvement in insomnia in the C+V arm at C2D15 (-12.4 points) was observed. Among patients who experienced a ⩾10-point change from baseline (responders), between-group differences were greatest for insomnia (16%), social functioning (10%), fatigue (9%) and pain (7%), all favouring C+V. Diarrhoea, photosensitivity reaction, pyrexia, and rash did not meaningfully affect global health status (GHS). Serous retinopathy was associated with a transient decrease in GHS at C1D15 assessment. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced/metastatic BRAF

4 Clinical Trial Adjuvant Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Stage III BRAF-Mutated Melanoma. 2017

Long, Georgina V / Hauschild, Axel / Santinami, Mario / Atkinson, Victoria / Mandalà, Mario / Chiarion-Sileni, Vanna / Larkin, James / Nyakas, Marta / Dutriaux, Caroline / Haydon, Andrew / Robert, Caroline / Mortier, Laurent / Schachter, Jacob / Schadendorf, Dirk / Lesimple, Thierry / Plummer, Ruth / Ji, Ran / Zhang, Pingkuan / Mookerjee, Bijoyesh / Legos, Jeff / Kefford, Richard / Dummer, Reinhard / Kirkwood, John M. ·From the Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Royal North Shore and Mater Hospitals (G.V.L.), and Macquarie University, Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, and Westmead Hospital (R.K.), Sydney, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Gallipoli Medical Research Foundation, University of Queensland, Brisbane (V.A.), and Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC (A. Haydon) - all in Australia · University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel (A. Hauschild), and University Hospital Essen, Essen, and the German Cancer Consortium, Heidelberg (D.S.) - all in Germany · Fondazione Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Milan (M.S.), Papa Giovanni XXIII Cancer Center Hospital, Bergamo (M.M.), and the Melanoma Oncology Unit, Veneto Oncology Institute, Padua (V.C.-S.) - all in Italy · Rikshospitalet-Radiumhospitalet, Oslo (M.N.) · Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Hôpital Saint-André, Bordeaux (C.D.), Institute Gustave Roussy, Paris (C.R.), Université de Lille, INSERM Unité 1189, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille, Lille (L.M.), and the Medical Oncology Department, Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes (T.L.) - all in France · Ella Institute for Melanoma, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel (J.S.) · Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London (J. Larkin), and Northern Centre for Cancer Care, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne (R.P.) - both in the United Kingdom · Novartis Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, NJ (R.J., P.Z., B.M., J. Legos) · University Hospital Zürich Skin Cancer Center, Zurich, Switzerland (R.D.) · and the Melanoma Program, Hillman UPMC Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (J.M.K.). ·N Engl J Med · Pubmed #28891408.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Combination therapy with the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib plus the MEK inhibitor trametinib improved survival in patients with advanced melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. We sought to determine whether adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib would improve outcomes in patients with resected, stage III melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 870 patients with completely resected, stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations to receive oral dabrafenib at a dose of 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib at a dose of 2 mg once daily (combination therapy, 438 patients) or two matched placebo tablets (432 patients) for 12 months. The primary end point was relapse-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, freedom from relapse, and safety. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 2.8 years, the estimated 3-year rate of relapse-free survival was 58% in the combination-therapy group and 39% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for relapse or death, 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.58; P<0.001). The 3-year overall survival rate was 86% in the combination-therapy group and 77% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P=0.0006), but this level of improvement did not cross the prespecified interim analysis boundary of P=0.000019. Rates of distant metastasis-free survival and freedom from relapse were also higher in the combination-therapy group than in the placebo group. The safety profile of dabrafenib plus trametinib was consistent with that observed with the combination in patients with metastatic melanoma. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant use of combination therapy with dabrafenib plus trametinib resulted in a significantly lower risk of recurrence in patients with stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations than the adjuvant use of placebo and was not associated with new toxic effects. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis; COMBI-AD ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01682083 ; EudraCT number, 2012-001266-15 .).

5 Clinical Trial Three-year pooled analysis of factors associated with clinical outcomes across dabrafenib and trametinib combination therapy phase 3 randomised trials. 2017

Schadendorf, Dirk / Long, Georgina V / Stroiakovski, Daniil / Karaszewska, Boguslawa / Hauschild, Axel / Levchenko, Evgeny / Chiarion-Sileni, Vanna / Schachter, Jacob / Garbe, Claus / Dutriaux, Caroline / Gogas, Helen / Mandalà, Mario / Haanen, John B A G / Lebbé, Céleste / Mackiewicz, Andrzej / Rutkowski, Piotr / Grob, Jean-Jacques / Nathan, Paul / Ribas, Antoni / Davies, Michael A / Zhang, Ying / Kaper, Mathilde / Mookerjee, Bijoyesh / Legos, Jeffrey J / Flaherty, Keith T / Robert, Caroline. ·Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstrasse 55, 45122 Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: Dirk.Schadendorf@uk-essen.de. · Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia; Mater Hospital, North Sydney, NSW, Australia; Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. · Moscow City Oncology Hospital No 62, Moscow 143423, Russia. · Przychodnia Lekarska KOMED, Wojska Polskiego 6, 62-500 Konin, Poland. · Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, 24105 Kiel, Germany. · Petrov Research Institute of Oncology, 68 Leningradskaya Street, Saint Petersburg 197758, Russia. · Melanoma and Esophageal Oncology Unit, Veneto Oncology Institute-IRCCS, Via Gattamelata 64, 35128 Padova, Italy. · Oncology Division, Sheba Medical Center, Tel HaShomer, Emek HaEla St 1, Ramat Gan, Israel. · Department of Dermatology, University of Tübingen, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz, 72074 Tübingen, Germany. · Service de Dermatologie et Dermatologie Pédiatrique, Hôpital Saint-André, 1 Rue Jean Burguet, 33000 Bordeaux, France. · First Department of Medicine, "Laiko" General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens 157 72, Greece. · Department of Oncology and Hematology, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy. · Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · APHP Dermatology and CIC Departments, INSERM U976, University Paris Diderot, Paris, France. · Department of Cancer Immunology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 15 Garbary Street, 61-866 Poznań, Poland. · Department of Soft Tissue/Bone Sarcoma and Melanoma, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Wawelska 15B, 02-034 Warsaw, Poland. · Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Center, Timone Hospital, Aix Marseille University, 264 Rue St Pierre, 13885 Marseille Cedex 05, France. · Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Road, HA6 2RN Northwood, UK. · Department of Medicine, Hematology/Oncology, UCLA Medical Center, 100 UCLA Medical Plaza, Suite 550, Los Angeles, CA, USA. · Melanoma Medical Oncology and Systems Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston 77030, TX, USA. · Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, 1 Health Plaza, East Hanover 07936, NJ, USA. · Developmental Therapeutics and Melanoma Programs, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, 55 Fruit Street, Boston 02114, MA, USA. · Department of Medical Oncology, Dermatology Service, Gustave Roussy Comprehensive Cancer Center and Faculty of Medicine, University Paris-South, F-94805, Villejuif, France. ·Eur J Cancer · Pubmed #28648698.

ABSTRACT: AIM: Understanding predictors of long-term benefit with currently available melanoma therapies is the key for optimising individualised treatments. A prior pooled analysis of dabrafenib plus trametinib (D + T)-randomised trials (median follow-up, 20.0 months) identified baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and number of organ sites with metastasis as predictive factors for progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival. However, longer-term follow-up analyses are needed to confirm which patients treated with D + T can achieve maximum benefit. METHODS: Three-year landmark data were retrospectively pooled for D + T patients in phase 3 trials (COMBI-d [NCT01584648]; COMBI-v [NCT01597908]). Univariate and multivariate analyses assessed prognostic values of predefined baseline factors; regression tree analysis determined hierarchy and interactions between variables. RESULTS: Long-term pooled outcomes were consistent with individual trial results (N = 563; 3-year PFS, 23%; 3-year OS, 44%). Baseline LDH level and number of organ sites remained strongly associated with and/or predictive of PFS and OS. In addition, baseline sum of lesion diameters (SLD) was identified as a predictor for progression. In the most favourable prognostic group (normal LDH, SLD <66 mm, <3 organ sites; n = 183/563 [33%]), 3-year PFS was 42%. Baseline number of organ sites was also predictive of outcomes in patients with PFS ≥ 6 months. CONCLUSION: Using the largest phase 3 data set available for BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination therapy in melanoma, these results demonstrate that durable responses lasting ≥3 years are possible in subsets of patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma receiving D + T. Although the best predictive model evolved with longer follow-up, factors predicting clinical outcomes with the combination remained consistent with previous analyses.

6 Clinical Trial Binimetinib versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced NRAS-mutant melanoma (NEMO): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. 2017

Dummer, Reinhard / Schadendorf, Dirk / Ascierto, Paolo A / Arance, Ana / Dutriaux, Caroline / Di Giacomo, Anna Maria / Rutkowski, Piotr / Del Vecchio, Michele / Gutzmer, Ralf / Mandala, Mario / Thomas, Luc / Demidov, Lev / Garbe, Claus / Hogg, David / Liszkay, Gabriella / Queirolo, Paola / Wasserman, Ernesto / Ford, James / Weill, Marine / Sirulnik, L Andres / Jehl, Valentine / Bozón, Viviana / Long, Georgina V / Flaherty, Keith. ·Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zürich Skin Cancer Center, Zürich, Switzerland. Electronic address: reinhard.dummer@usz.ch. · Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, Heidelberg, Germany. · Melanoma Unit, Cancer Immunotherapy and Innovative Therapies, Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione Pascale, Via Mariano Semmola, Naples, Italy. · Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Oncologic Dermatology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Hôpital Saint-André, Bordeaux, France. · Medical Oncology and Immunotherapy, University Hospital of Siena, Viale Bracci, Siena, Italy. · Department of Soft Tissue/Bone Sarcoma and Melanoma, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland. · Department of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, Milan, Italy. · Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Skin Cancer Center Hannover, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. · Department of Oncology and Haematology, Papa Giovanni XXIII Cancer Center Hospital, Bergamo, Italy. · Department of Dermatology, Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, Lyons Cancer Research Center, Lyon 1 University, Pierre Bénite, France. · N N Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Ministry of Health, Moscow, Russian Federation. · Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. · Department of Medicine, University Health Network/Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. · Department of Dermatology, National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, IRCCS San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi, Genova, Italy. · Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, One Health Plaza, East Hanover, NJ, USA. · Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland. · Array BioPharma, Boulder, CO, USA. · Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Royal North Shore and Mater Hospitals, Sydney, NSW, Australia. · Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #28284557.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: There are no established therapies specific for NRAS-mutant melanoma despite the emergence of immunotherapy. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the MEK inhibitor binimetinib versus that of dacarbazine in patients with advanced NRAS-mutant melanoma. METHODS: NEMO is an ongoing, randomised, open-label phase 3 study done at 118 hospitals in 26 countries. Patients with advanced, unresectable, American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIIC or stage IV NRAS-mutant melanoma who were previously untreated or had progressed on or after previous immunotherapy were randomised (2:1) to receive either binimetinib 45 mg orally twice daily or dacarbazine 1000 mg/m FINDINGS: Between Aug 19, 2013, and April 28, 2015, 402 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 269 to binimetinib and 133 to dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 1·7 months (IQR 1·4-4·1). Median progression-free survival was 2·8 months (95% CI 2·8-3·6) in the binimetinib group and 1·5 months (1·5-1·7) in the dacarbazine group (hazard ratio 0·62 [95% CI 0·47-0·80]; one-sided p<0·001). Grade 3-4 adverse events seen in at least 5% of patients the safety population in either group were increased creatine phosphokinase (52 [19%] of 269 patients in the binimetinib group vs none of 114 in the dacarbazine group), hypertension (20 [7%] vs two [2%]), anaemia (five [2%] vs six [5%]), and neutropenia (two [1%] vs ten [9%]). Serious adverse events (all grades) occurred in 91 (34%) patients in the binimetinib group and 25 (22%) patients in the dacarbazine group. INTERPRETATION: Binimetinib improved progression-free survival compared with dacarbazine and was tolerable. Binimetinib might represent a new treatment option for patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma after failure of immunotherapy. FUNDING: Array BioPharma and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

7 Clinical Trial Cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib in advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma (coBRIM): updated efficacy results from a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. 2016

Ascierto, Paolo A / McArthur, Grant A / Dréno, Brigitte / Atkinson, Victoria / Liszkay, Gabrielle / Di Giacomo, Anna Maria / Mandalà, Mario / Demidov, Lev / Stroyakovskiy, Daniil / Thomas, Luc / de la Cruz-Merino, Luis / Dutriaux, Caroline / Garbe, Claus / Yan, Yibing / Wongchenko, Matthew / Chang, Ilsung / Hsu, Jessie J / Koralek, Daniel O / Rooney, Isabelle / Ribas, Antoni / Larkin, James. ·Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G Pascale, Naples, Italy. · Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: grant.mcarthur@petermac.org. · Nantes University, Nantes, France. · Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, QLD, Australia. · National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary. · Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena, Italy. · Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy. · N N Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia. · Moscow City Oncology Hospital 62, Krasnogorsk, Russia. · Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France; Lyons Cancer Research Center, Lyon, France. · Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Seville, Spain. · Hôpital Saint André, Bordeaux, France. · University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. · Genentech Inc, South San Francisco, CA, USA. · Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center at University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. · Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #27480103.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The combination of cobimetinib with vemurafenib improves progression-free survival compared with placebo and vemurafenib in previously untreated patients with BRAF(V600)-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 BRAF(V600) 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 BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech.

8 Clinical Trial Sorafenib in metastatic uveal melanoma: efficacy, toxicity and health-related quality of life in a multicentre phase II study. 2016

Mouriaux, F / Servois, V / Parienti, J J / Lesimple, T / Thyss, A / Dutriaux, C / Neidhart-Berard, E M / Penel, N / Delcambre, C / Peyro Saint Paul, L / Pham, A D / Heutte, N / Piperno-Neumann, S / Joly, F. ·Service d'ophtalmologie (Department of Ophthalmology), CHU Rennes, 35033 Rennes, France. · Faculté de Médecine (Faculty of Medicine), Université de Rennes 1, F35043 Rennes, France. · Centre universitaire d'ophtalmologie-Recherche (Ophthalmology-Research University Centre), Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec (CHU Quebec Research Centre), G1S 4L8 Québec, Canada. · CHU Caen, F-14033 Caen France. · Institut Curie, Département d'Imagerie Médicale (Curie Institute, Department of Medical Imaging), F-75005 Paris, France. · Centre Eugène Marquis, F-35000 Rennes, France. · Centre Antoine Lacassagne, F-06000 Nice, France. · Service Dermatologie (Dermatology Department), CHU de Bordeaux, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. · Centre Léon Bérard, F-69000 Lyon, France. · Centre Oscar Lambret, F-59000 Lille, France. · Centre François Baclesse, F-14000 Caen France. · Département d'Oncologie Médicale, Institut Curie, (Department of Medical Oncology, Curie Institute), 75005 Paris, France. ·Br J Cancer · Pubmed #27253171.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to analyse efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for sorafenib treatment in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. METHODS: A multicentre, single-arm phase II trial was conducted. The primary objective was to determine the non-progression rate (RECIST) at 24 weeks for patients receiving sorafenib at a dose of 800 mg per day. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and HRQoL. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included. Ten patients showed non-progression at 24 weeks (31.2%) without objective tumour responses. The estimated 24-week PFS was 31.2% (95% CI: 14.8%-47.6%) and the estimated 24-week OS was 62.5% (95% CI: 45.4%-79.6%). Ten patients (34.3%) had at least one grade 3 or 4 adverse reaction and 12 patients (41.4%) required dose modifications due to toxicity. At 24 weeks, no patient had an improvement in global HRQoL and 87.5% experienced a permanent increase in physical fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib demonstrated non-progression at 24 weeks in 31.2% of patients. However, 41.4% of patients required dose modifications due to toxicity and no improvement in HRQoL was demonstrated.

9 Clinical Trial First-in-human phase I study of the DNA-repair inhibitor DT01 in combination with radiotherapy in patients with skin metastases from melanoma. 2016

Le Tourneau, C / Dreno, B / Kirova, Y / Grob, J J / Jouary, T / Dutriaux, C / Thomas, L / Lebbé, C / Mortier, L / Saiag, P / Avril, M F / Maubec, E / Joly, P / Bey, P / Cosset, J M / Sun, J S / Asselain, B / Devun, F / Marty, M E / Dutreix, M. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris & Saint-Cloud 75005, France. · EA7285, Versailles-Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University, Versailles 78000, France. · CHU de Nantes-Hôtel Dieu, Nantes 44093, France. · Radiotherapy Department, Institut Curie, Paris 75005, France. · La Timone Hospital-APHM, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille 13385, France. · Dermatology department, Saint-André Hospital, CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux 33000, France. · Lyon Sud Hospital Center, Lyon 1 University, Pierre Benite 69495, France. · Saint-Louis Hospital, APHP, Paris 75010, France. · Dermatology department, CHRU of Lille, Lille 59037, France. · Ambroise Paré Hospital, Boulogne Billancourt 92104, France. · Cochin hospital, APHP, Paris 75014, France. · Bichat Hospital, Paris 75877, France. · CHU Rouen, Charles-Nicolle, Rouen 76000, France. · Institut Curie, Paris 75005, France. · DNA Therapeutics, Evry 91058, France. · Department of Biostatistics, Institut Curie, Paris 75005, France. · Institut Curie, Orsay 91405, France. · CNRS-UMR3347, INSERM-U1021, Paris-Sud University, Orsay 91405, France. ·Br J Cancer · Pubmed #27140316.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: DT01 is a DNA-repair inhibitor preventing recruitment of DNA-repair enzymes at damage sites. Safety, pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy through intratumoural and peritumoural injections of DT01 were evaluated in combination with radiotherapy in a first-in-human phase I trial in patients with unresectable skin metastases from melanoma. METHODS: Twenty-three patients were included and received radiotherapy (30 Gy in 10 sessions) on all selected tumour lesions, comprising of two lesions injected with DT01 three times a week during the 2 weeks of radiotherapy. DT01 dose levels of 16, 32, 48, 64 and 96 mg were used, in a 3+3 dose escalation design, with an expansion cohort at 96 mg. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 180 days. All patients were evaluable for safety and pharmacokinetics. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed and the maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. Most frequent adverse events were reversible grades 1 and 2 injection site reactions. Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated a systemic passage of DT01. Twenty-one patients were evaluable for efficacy on 76 lesions. Objective response was observed in 45 lesions (59%), including 23 complete responses (30%). CONCLUSIONS: Intratumoural and peritumoural DT01 in combination with radiotherapy is safe and pharmacokinetic analyses suggest a systemic passage of DT01.

10 Clinical Trial Nivolumab in previously untreated melanoma without BRAF mutation. 2015

Robert, Caroline / Long, Georgina V / Brady, Benjamin / Dutriaux, Caroline / Maio, Michele / Mortier, Laurent / Hassel, Jessica C / Rutkowski, Piotr / McNeil, Catriona / Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa / Savage, Kerry J / Hernberg, Micaela M / Lebbé, Celeste / Charles, Julie / Mihalcioiu, Catalin / Chiarion-Sileni, Vanna / Mauch, Cornelia / Cognetti, Francesco / Arance, Ana / Schmidt, Henrik / Schadendorf, Dirk / Gogas, Helen / Lundgren-Eriksson, Lotta / Horak, Christine / Sharkey, Brian / Waxman, Ian M / Atkinson, Victoria / Ascierto, Paolo A. ·The authors' affiliations are listed in the Appendix. ·N Engl J Med · Pubmed #25399552.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Nivolumab was associated with higher rates of objective response than chemotherapy in a phase 3 study involving patients with ipilimumab-refractory metastatic melanoma. The use of nivolumab in previously untreated patients with advanced melanoma has not been tested in a phase 3 controlled study. METHODS: We randomly assigned 418 previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma without a BRAF mutation to receive nivolumab (at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks and dacarbazine-matched placebo every 3 weeks) or dacarbazine (at a dose of 1000 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks and nivolumab-matched placebo every 2 weeks). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: At 1 year, the overall rate of survival was 72.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.5 to 78.9) in the nivolumab group, as compared with 42.1% (95% CI, 33.0 to 50.9) in the dacarbazine group (hazard ratio for death, 0.42; 99.79% CI, 0.25 to 0.73; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 5.1 months in the nivolumab group versus 2.2 months in the dacarbazine group (hazard ratio for death or progression of disease, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.56; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 40.0% (95% CI, 33.3 to 47.0) in the nivolumab group versus 13.9% (95% CI, 9.5 to 19.4) in the dacarbazine group (odds ratio, 4.06; P<0.001). The survival benefit with nivolumab versus dacarbazine was observed across prespecified subgroups, including subgroups defined by status regarding the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). Common adverse events associated with nivolumab included fatigue, pruritus, and nausea. Drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 11.7% of the patients treated with nivolumab and 17.6% of those treated with dacarbazine. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab was associated with significant improvements in overall survival and progression-free survival, as compared with dacarbazine, among previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma without a BRAF mutation. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 066 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01721772.).

11 Clinical Trial Combined vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAF-mutated melanoma. 2014

Larkin, James / Ascierto, Paolo A / Dréno, Brigitte / Atkinson, Victoria / Liszkay, Gabriella / Maio, Michele / Mandalà, Mario / Demidov, Lev / Stroyakovskiy, Daniil / Thomas, Luc / de la Cruz-Merino, Luis / Dutriaux, Caroline / Garbe, Claus / Sovak, Mika A / Chang, Ilsung / Choong, Nicholas / Hack, Stephen P / McArthur, Grant A / Ribas, Antoni. ·From Royal Marsden Hospital, London (J.L.) · Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples (P.A.A.), Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena (M. Maio), and Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo (M. Mandalà) - all in Italy · Hôtel Dieu Place Alexis Ricordeau, Nantes (B.D.), Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, Pierre-Bénite (L.T.), and Hôpital Saint André, Bordeaux (C.D.) - all in France · Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, QLD (V.A.), and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC (G.A.M.) - both in Australia · National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary (G.L.) · N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow (L.D.), and Moscow City Oncology Hospital 62, Krasnogorsk (D.S.) - both in Russia · Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Seville, Spain (L.C.-M.) · University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany (C.G.) · Genentech, South San Francisco, CA (M.A.S., I.C., N.C., S.P.H.) · and Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles (A.R.). ·N Engl J Med · Pubmed #25265494.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The combined inhibition of BRAF and MEK is hypothesized to improve clinical outcomes in patients with melanoma by preventing or delaying the onset of resistance observed with BRAF inhibitors alone. This randomized phase 3 study evaluated the combination of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib. METHODS: We randomly assigned 495 patients with previously untreated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma to receive vemurafenib and cobimetinib (combination group) or vemurafenib and placebo (control group). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 9.9 months in the combination group and 6.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.68; P<0.001). The rate of complete or partial response in the combination group was 68%, as compared with 45% in the control group (P<0.001), including rates of complete response of 10% in the combination group and 4% in the control group. Progression-free survival as assessed by independent review was similar to investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Interim analyses of overall survival showed 9-month survival rates of 81% (95% CI, 75 to 87) in the combination group and 73% (95% CI, 65 to 80) in the control group. Vemurafenib and cobimetinib was associated with a nonsignificantly higher incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher, as compared with vemurafenib and placebo (65% vs. 59%), and there was no significant difference in the rate of study-drug discontinuation. The number of secondary cutaneous cancers decreased with the combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of cobimetinib to vemurafenib was associated with a significant improvement in progression-free survival among patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma, at the cost of some increase in toxicity. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; coBRIM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01689519.).

12 Article Adverse events need for hospitalization and systemic immunosuppression in very elderly patients (over 80 years) treated with ipilimumab for metastatic melanoma. 2019

Leroy, Vaianu / Gerard, Emilie / Dutriaux, Caroline / Prey, Sorilla / Gey, Aurelia / Mertens, Cécile / Beylot-Barry, Marie / Pham-Ledard, Anne. ·Hôpital Saint André, service de Dermatologie, University Hospital of Bordeaux, 1 rue Jean Burguet, 33000, Bordeaux, France. · Department of Clinical Gerontology, University Hospital of Bordeaux, 33000, Bordeaux, France. · Univ. Bordeaux, INSERM U1053, Team 3 Oncogenesis of Cutaneous Lymphoma, 33076, Bordeaux, France. · Hôpital Saint André, service de Dermatologie, University Hospital of Bordeaux, 1 rue Jean Burguet, 33000, Bordeaux, France. anne.pham-ledard@chu-bordeaux.fr. · Univ. Bordeaux, INSERM U1053, Team 3 Oncogenesis of Cutaneous Lymphoma, 33076, Bordeaux, France. anne.pham-ledard@chu-bordeaux.fr. ·Cancer Immunol Immunother · Pubmed #30661086.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitors are first-line therapies in melanoma, but safety in older adults has not yet been assessed. Ipilimumab improves survival, but immunologic-related adverse events (AEs) can be threatening, and its use in elderly people raises questions. AIM: To assess safety in a cohort of very elderly patients treated with ipilimumab. METHODS: All patients over 80 years treated with ipilimumab for melanoma were retrospectively included. AE occurrence, management, and outcome, as well as response rate at week 16 and overall survival were recorded, and compared to data for a group of younger patients treated in our institution during the same period. RESULTS: In the elderly group, 23 patients were included with a median age of 82 years [80-90]. AEs amounting to 23 occurred in 15 patients (65%) with 5 grade 3 (22%) and 1 grade 5 (opportunistic infection) AEs. Corticosteroids were required for five (22%) patients, additive immunosuppressive therapy for two, hospitalization for four, and definitive interruption of ipilimumab for three. Median overall survival was 14 months. In the younger group, 29 patients were included with a median age of 58 years. AEs occurred in 15/29 (52%) with 4 grade 3 (19%) and 1 grade 4 (7%). Median OS was 17 months. CONCLUSION: Serious AEs occurred in 80 + adults at the same rate as observed in our younger patients and as previously reported in younger populations. Ipilimumab can be an option in elderly patients, as patients may benefit from therapy and safety seems to be manageable.

13 Article Benefit of the nivolumab and ipilimumab combination in pretreated advanced melanoma. 2018

Tétu, Pauline / Mangana, Joanna / Dummer, Reinhard / Dutriaux, Caroline / Beneton, Nathalie / Dalle, Stéphane / Meyer, Nicolas / Oriano, Bastien / Michielin, Olivier / Lebbe, Céleste. ·Department of Dermatology, AP-HP, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Paris, France. Electronic address: pauline.tetu@hotmail.fr. · Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. · Department of Dermatology, Bordeaux, France. · Department of Dermatology, Le Mans, France. · Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie de Lyon, Institut de Cancérologie des Hospices Civils de Lyon, Université de Lyon, Lyon, France. · Department of Dermatology, Université Paul Sabatier, Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole et CHU Larrey, Toulouse, France. · Biostatistics, AP-HP, Hôtel-Dieu Hospital, Paris, France. · Department of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland. · APHP Dermatology, Department of Dermatology and CIC, Paris 7 Diderot University, INSERM U976, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Paris, France. ·Eur J Cancer · Pubmed #29449059.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

14 Article Trough dabrafenib plasma concentrations can predict occurrence of adverse events requiring dose reduction in metastatic melanoma. 2017

Rousset, Marine / Dutriaux, Caroline / Bosco-Lévy, Pauline / Prey, Sorilla / Pham-Ledard, Anne / Dousset, Léa / Gérard, Emilie / Bouchet, Stephane / Canal-Raffin, Mireille / Titier, Karine / Molimard, Mathieu. ·Département de Pharmacologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France; Univ. Bordeaux INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, team PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY, UMR 1219, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. Electronic address: marine.rousset@u-bordeaux.fr. · Département de Dermatologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. · Département de Pharmacologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France; Univ. Bordeaux INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, team PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY, UMR 1219, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. · Département de Dermatologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France; EA2406 Histology and Molecular Pathology of Tumors, University of Bordeaux, F-33000, France. · Département de Pharmacologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France; Univ. Bordeaux INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, team Cancer-environnement-EPICENE, UMR 1219, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. · Département de Pharmacologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. · Département de Pharmacologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France; Univ. Bordeaux INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, team PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY, UMR 1219, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. Electronic address: mathieu.molimard@u-bordeaux.fr. ·Clin Chim Acta · Pubmed #28709799.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Dabrafenib and trametinib bitherapy provides significant benefits in BRAFV600 METHODS: Plasma samples from metastatic BRAFV600 RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (13M/14F) were included. Dabrafenib trough plasma concentrations displayed high interindividual variability, ranging from 15.4 to 279.6ng/ml, mean±SD 58.7±61.1ng/ml. Trough trametinib plasma concentrations ranged from 4.1 to 23.8ng/ml, mean±SD 11.9±4.1ng/ml. Mean trough dabrafenib plasma concentration was higher in patients with AE requiring dose reduction (30%) than in other patients: 118.6ng/ml and 33.5ng/ml respectively (P<0.0001). Adverse events leading to dabrafenib dose reduction were all grade≥2. No differences in mean trametinib trough plasma concentrations were observed in patients requiring or not dose reduction. A dabrafenib trough plasma threshold of 48ng/ml can predict the occurrence of adverse events requiring dose reduction.

15 Article An UPLC-MS/MS method for the quantification of BRAF inhibitors (vemurafenib, dabrafenib) and MEK inhibitors (cobimetinib, trametinib, binimetinib) in human plasma. Application to treated melanoma patients. 2017

Rousset, Marine / Titier, Karine / Bouchet, Stephane / Dutriaux, Caroline / Pham-Ledard, Anne / Prey, Sorilla / Canal-Raffin, Mireille / Molimard, Mathieu. ·Department of Pharmacology, University Hospital Bordeaux, F-33000, France; Univ. Bordeaux INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, team PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY, UMR 1219, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. Electronic address: marine.rousset@chu-bordeaux.fr. · Department of Pharmacology, University Hospital Bordeaux, F-33000, France. · Department of Pharmacology, University Hospital Bordeaux, F-33000, France; Univ. Bordeaux INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, team PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY, UMR 1219, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. · Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Bordeaux, F-33000, France. · Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Bordeaux, F-33000, France; EA2406 Histology and Molecular Pathology of Tumors, University of Bordeaux, F-33000, France. · Department of Pharmacology, University Hospital Bordeaux, F-33000, France; Univ. Bordeaux INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, team Cancer-environnement-EPICENE, UMR 1219, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. ·Clin Chim Acta · Pubmed #28412197.

ABSTRACT: Targeted therapies for cancers are fast-growing therapies. For instance kinase inhibitors such as BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitors (MEKi) are increasingly used to treat malignant melanoma. The metabolic profile of these drugs can result in great interindividual variability, justifying therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). We describe a rapid and specific method for quantification of 2 BRAFi (vemurafenib, dabrafenib) and 3 MEKi (cobimetinib, trametinib and binimetinib). Chromatography was performed on a Waters Acquity-UPLC system with CORTECS C18+ column, under a gradient of 10% acetic acid in water/acetonitrile. An Acquity-TQD® with electrospray ionization was used for detection. Samples were prepared by solid phase extraction (Oasis® MCX microElution) before injection in the system. Calibration curves ranges from 0.4 to 100μg/ml for vemurafenib, from 1 to 1000ng/ml for dabrafenib, from 0.5 to 500ng/ml for cobimetinib and binimetinib, and from 0.75 to 250ng/ml for trametinib. At all concentrations the bias was within ±15% of the nominal concentrations and precision was ≤15%. All results were within the acceptance criteria of the EMA guidelines on method validation. This rapid, sensitive and specific UPLC-MS/MS method can perform simultaneous quantification of targeted therapies used in malignant melanoma and is usable for routine TDM.

16 Article Primary digestive melanoma in association with tubular adenoma: a case report illustrating the distinction from metastatic colonic melanoma. 2016

Furudoï, Adeline / Caumont, Charline / Dutriaux, Caroline / Cappellen, David / Goussot, Jean-François / Vergier, Béatrice / Merlio, Christine / Barberis, Christophe / Merlio, Jean-Philippe / Gros, Audrey. ·Cancer Biobank and Tumor Biology Laboratory, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Pessac, 33604, France. · Cancer Biobank and Tumor Biology Laboratory, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Pessac, 33604, France; EA2406, Histology and Molecular Pathology of Tumors, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, 33076, France. · Department of Dermatology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, 33000, France. · Department of Pathology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Pessac 33604, France. · EA2406, Histology and Molecular Pathology of Tumors, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, 33076, France; Department of Pathology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Pessac 33604, France. · Pathology Laboratory, Talence, 33400, France. · Gastroenterology Department, Maison de Santé Bagatelle, Talence, 33400, France. · Cancer Biobank and Tumor Biology Laboratory, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Pessac, 33604, France; EA2406, Histology and Molecular Pathology of Tumors, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, 33076, France. Electronic address: jp.merlio@u-bordeaux.fr. ·Hum Pathol · Pubmed #26616020.

ABSTRACT: We report here an exceptional pattern of atypical lentiginous melanocytic proliferation within an adenoma, leading to focal lamina propria infiltration and pulmonary metastasis, which was considered as primary colonic mucosal melanoma (MM) in a Caucasian patient. Such case illustrates the diagnosis criteria required to differentiate primary MM from colonic metastasis of melanoma, including the absence of past history of other primary melanoma, a unique colonic and abdominal lesion with predominant features of in situ lentiginous MM and a very focal and unique invasive area without other digestive tract or abdominal localization. This tumor displayed a KIT exon 11 mutation leading to a unique combination of p.I571M and p.D572G deleterious amino acid changes. Such pattern also favors the diagnosis as KIT appears as a master oncogenic player in MM oncogenesis.

17 Article Immunohistochemistry as a potential tool for routine detection of the NRAS Q61R mutation in patients with metastatic melanoma. 2015

Ilie, Marius / Long-Mira, Elodie / Funck-Brentano, Elisa / Lassalle, Sandra / Butori, Catherine / Lespinet-Fabre, Virginie / Bordone, Olivier / Gay, Alexandre / Zahaf, Katia / Poissonnet, Gilles / Lacour, Jean-Philippe / Bahadoran, Philippe / Ballotti, Robert / Gros, Audrey / Dutriaux, Caroline / Saiag, Philippe / Merlio, Jean-Philippe / Vergier, Béatrice / Emile, Jean François / Hofman, Véronique / Hofman, Paul. ·Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Pasteur Hospital, Nice, France; Human Biobank BB-0033-00025, Pasteur Hospital, Nice, France. · Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Pasteur Hospital, Nice, France. · EA4340-Biomarqueurs en Cancérologie et Onco-Hématologie (BCOH), University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (SQY), Boulogne, France; Department of General and Oncologic Dermatology, Ambroise Paré Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Boulogne, France. · Human Biobank BB-0033-00025, Pasteur Hospital, Nice, France. · Surgery Department, Comprehensive Cancer Center Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France. · Dermatology Department, Archet II Hospital, Nice, France. · Dermatology Department, Archet II Hospital, Nice, France; Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) U1065, Team 1, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France. · Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) U1065, Team 1, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France. · Pathology and Molecular Biology Departments, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) and EA2406 University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. · Department of Oncologic Dermatology, CHU Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. · EA4340-Biomarqueurs en Cancérologie et Onco-Hématologie (BCOH), University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (SQY), Boulogne, France; Department of Pathology, Ambroise Paré Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Boulogne, France. · Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Pasteur Hospital, Nice, France; Human Biobank BB-0033-00025, Pasteur Hospital, Nice, France. Electronic address: hofman.p@chu-nice.fr. ·J Am Acad Dermatol · Pubmed #25659223.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: It can be useful to assess the NRAS mutation status in patients with metastatic melanoma because NRAS-activating mutations confer resistance to RAF inhibitors, and NRAS-mutated patients appear to be sensitive to mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) inhibitors. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of an immunohistochemistry (IHC) approach using a novel anti-NRAS (Q61R) monoclonal antibody on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples from patients with metastatic melanoma. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study on 170 patients with metastatic melanoma. The automated IHC assay was performed using the SP174 clone, and compared with results of the molecular testing. RESULTS: Evaluation of a test cohort with knowledge of the mutation status established a specific IHC pattern for the mutation. In the independent blinded analysis of the remaining cases, the anti-NRAS (Q61R) antibody accurately identified all NRAS Q61R-mutated tumors, and demonstrated 100% sensitivity and specificity. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include retrospective design and lack of multicenter interobserver reproducibility. CONCLUSION: The NRAS (Q61R) IHC assay is reliable and specific for the evaluation of the Q61R mutation status in metastatic melanoma and may be an alternative to molecular biology in evaluation of metastatic melanoma in routine practice.

18 Article Ipilimumab in melanoma patients with brain metastasis: a retro-spective multicentre evaluation of thirty-eight patients. 2014

Konstantinou, Maria-Polina / Dutriaux, Caroline / Gaudy-Marqueste, Caroline / Mortier, Laurent / Bedane, Christophe / Girard, Céline / Thellier, Sophie / Jouary, Thomas / Grob, Jean-Jacques / Richard, Marie-Aleth / Templier, Caroline / Sakji, Lilia / Guillot, Bernard / Paul, Carle / Meyer, Nicolas. ·Department of Dermatology, Toulouse III University and Larrey Hospital, 31059 Toulouse Cedex 9, France. ·Acta Derm Venereol · Pubmed #23824275.

ABSTRACT: Treatment with ipilimumab, a monoclonal antibody that antagonizes cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), results in improved survival of patients with stage IIIc-IV melanoma. However, there is a lack of data on the efficacy of ipilimumab in patients with brain metastases. To evaluate the efficacy of ipilimumab for the treatment of brain metastasis in melanoma, a multicentre, retrospective analysis of 38 patients with brain metastases in melanoma, treated with ipilimumab in the context of the French Expanded Access Program, was performed. Three patients had a 3 partial response, 5 stable disease, 15 disease progression and 15 patients died during the induction phase due to disease progression. Median overall survival was 101 days (range 54-154). The brain metastases control rate was 16% (6/38). Ipilimumab may be effective in a few patients with central nervous system metastasis. However, patients with brain metastases and a low life expectancy may not benefit sufficiently from treatment with ipilimumab.

19 Article Metastatic melanoma with leukaemia-like evolution. 2013

Bertolotti, Antoine / Conte, Héléne / Amazan, Emmanuelle / Dutriaux, Caroline / Ezzedine, Khaled / Parrens, Marie / Vergier, Béatrice / Taieb, Alain / Jouary, Thomas. ·Department of Dermatology, Hopital Saint Andre, FR-33075 Bordeaux, France. ·Acta Derm Venereol · Pubmed #23529281.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --