Paul B Chapman

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, United States

Are you Paul B Chapman?

Claim your profile

Publications (116)1525.73 Total impact

  • Emily C Zabor · Glenn Heller · Lawrence H Schwartz · Paul B Chapman ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: Surrogate endpoints are needed that correlate with overall survival (OS). We analyzed individual patient tumor data from a phase III trial of vemurafenib vs. dacarbazine (BRIM3) to identify criteria for tumor measures that correlated with OS. Correlates were validated using a separate data set from a phase II trial of vemurafenib (BRIM2). Experimental design: De-identified tumor measurements and OS data from BRIM3 and from BRIM2 were analyzed. Target tumor measurement data and non-target tumor data were available from pretreatment, weeks 6,12, and every 9 weeks thereafter. In the BRIM3 data set, associations of OS with both early tumor response (first 12 weeks) and time to progression (TTP) were assessed. Different definitions of response and progression were explored. Findings were validated using the BRIM2 data set. Results: Thresholds of early response were explored ranging from any degree of tumor shrinkage to 100% tumor shrinkage. Correlation was weak at all thresholds tested. TTP, however, was more strongly correlated with OS. The strongest correlation was seen when progression was defined as ≥50% increase in the sum of tumor diameters or appearance of new tumors. This was confirmed by similar analyses in the BRIM2 cohort. Conclusions: TTP defined as ≥50% increase in the sum of tumor diameters or appearance of new tumors was more strongly associated with OS than early tumor shrinkage in melanoma patients treated with RAF inhibitor. In future trials, consideration should be given to replacing response rate with TTP or PFS as preferable clinical endpoints in early phase studies.
    Clinical Cancer Research 10/2015; DOI:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1441 · 8.72 Impact Factor
  • Source

    Oral Oncology 09/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2015.08.014 · 3.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ipilimumab is a standard treatment for metastatic melanoma, but immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are common and can be severe. We reviewed our large, contemporary experience with ipilimumab treatment outside of clinical trials to determine the frequency of use of systemic corticosteroid or anti-tumor necrosis factor α (anti-TNFα) therapy and the effect of these therapies on overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF). We reviewed retrospectively the medical records of patients with melanoma who had received treatment between April 2011 and July 2013 with ipilimumab at the standard dose of 3 mg/kg. We collected data on patient demographics, previous and subsequent treatments, number of ipilimumab doses, irAEs and how they were treated, and overall survival. Of the 298 patients, 254 (85%) experienced an irAE of any grade. Fifty-six patients (19%) discontinued therapy because of an irAE, most commonly diarrhea. Overall, 103 patients (35%) required systemic corticosteroid treatment for an irAE; 29 (10%) also required anti-TNFα therapy. Defining TTF as either starting a new treatment or death, estimated median TTF was 5.7 months. Twelve percent of patients experienced long-term disease control without receiving additional antimelanoma therapy. OS and TTF were not affected by the occurrence of irAEs or the need for systemic corticosteroids. IrAEs are common in patients treated with ipilimumab. In our experience, approximately one-third of ipilimumab-treated patients required systemic corticosteroids, and almost one-third of those required further immune suppression with anti-TNFα therapy. Practitioners and patients should be prepared to treat irAEs and should understand that such treatment does not affect OS or TTF. © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 08/2015; 33(28). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2015.60.8448 · 18.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) extend survival in BRAF mutant melanoma but can promote the growth of Ras mutant neoplasms. This study determined if gastrointestinal polyps found in BRAFi-treated patients harbored Ras mutations. Colonic and gastric polyps were resected from BRAFi-treated melanoma patients. Next generation sequencing (NGS) was performed on polyps. The ability of BRAFi to promote polyp formation was functionally characterized in Apc Min +/- mice. MAPK and beta catenin pathway activity was assessed by immunohistochemistry in mouse and human polyps. 14 patients treated with BRAFi underwent endoscopy to assess for polyps. Seven out of 7 patients >40 years of age and treated for >2 years were found to have colonic tubular adenomas with 4 out of the 7 patients having 5 or more polyps.No patient had adenocarcinoma. One patient presented with bleeding from hyperplastic gastric polyps that recurred 6 months after BRAFi rechallenge. NGS performed on polyps found no mutations in MAPK pathway genes, but found APC mutations in all tubular adenomas. A significant increase in the number of polyps was observed in BRAFi-treated compared to control-treated Apc Min +/- mice (20.8 ± 9.2 v. 12.8 ± 0.1; p=0.016). No polyps were observed in BRAFi-treated wild type mice. BRAF inhibitors may increase the risk of developing hyperplastic gastric polyps and colonic adenomatous polyps. Due to the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and the possibility of malignant transformation, further studies are needed to determine whether or not endoscopic surveillance should be recommended for patients treated with BRAF inhibitors. Copyright © 2015, American Association for Cancer Research.
    Clinical Cancer Research 07/2015; DOI:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0469 · 8.72 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The approved dose of ipilimumab is 3 mg/kg infused over 90 minutes; however, in clinical trials, 10 mg/kg has also been infused over 90 minutes. At this higher dose, patients receive 3 mg/kg within the first 27 minutes of treatment. We sought to determine whether the standard dose of 3 mg/kg could be safely infused over 30 minutes. We reviewed retrospectively the incidence of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) to ipilimumab at our institution in patients receiving doses of either 3 or 10 mg/kg infused over 90 minutes. Our findings led to a change in institutional guidelines for ipilimumab infusion time from 90 minutes to 30 minutes. We reviewed the first 14 months of our prospective experience using a 30-minute infusion of ipilimumab. Between April 1, 2008, and June 30, 2013, 595 patients received 2,507 doses of ipilimumab infused at either 3 mg/kg (n = 457) or 10 mg/kg (n = 138) over 90 minutes. Although the 10 mg/kg group had a higher incidence of IRRs (4.3%) than the 3 mg/kg group (2.2%), this difference was not statistically significant (P = .22). In 120 patients treated prospectively with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg infused over 30 minutes, seven patients (5.8%) had an IRR (P = .06 compared with 90-minute infusions). All IRRs occurred at dose 2; six were grade 2, and one was grade 3. All seven patients received subsequent doses of ipilimumab safely, the majority with premedication. Ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg can be infused safely over 30 minutes with an acceptably low incidence of IRRs. After an IRR, patients can safely receive additional doses of ipilimumab with premedication. © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 06/2015; 33(30). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2015.61.0030 · 18.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Targeted therapies and immunotherapies have led to significant improvements in the treatment of advanced cancers, including metastatic melanoma. However, new strategies are desperately needed to overcome therapeutic resistance to these agents, as well as to identify effective treatment approaches for cancer patients that fall outside major targetable mutational subtypes (e.g. non-V600 BRAF melanoma). One such strategy is to extend the paradigm of individually tailored, molecularly targeted therapy into a broader spectrum of melanoma patients, particularly those bearing tumors without commonly recognized therapeutic targets, as well as having failed or were ineligible for immunotherapy. In this non-treatment pilot study, next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies were utilized, including whole genome and whole transcriptome sequencing, to identify molecular aberrations in patients with non-V600 BRAF Metastatic Melanoma (MM). This information was then rationally matched to an appropriate clinical treatment from a defined pharmacopeia. Five patients with advanced non-V600 BRAF MM were enrolled. We demonstrated successful performance of the following during a clinically relevant time period: patient tumor biopsy, quality DNA/RNA extraction, DNA/RNA-based sequencing for gene expression analysis, analysis utilizing a series of data integration methodologies, report generation, and tumor board review with formulated treatment plan. Streamlining measures were conducted based on the experiences of enrolling, collecting specimens, and analyzing the molecular signatures of patients. We demonstrated the feasibility of using NGS to identify molecular aberrations and generate an individualized treatment plan in this patient population. A randomized treatment study utilizing lessons learned from the conduct of this pilot study is currently underway. Copyright © 2015, American Association for Cancer Research.
    Molecular Cancer Therapeutics 06/2015; 14(8). DOI:10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0153 · 5.68 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Vemurafenib induces tumour regression in most patients with BRAF(V600E)-mutant melanoma; eventually, most experience progressive disease (PD). Long-term follow-up of patients with BRAF(V600E) melanoma treated in the phase 1 vemurafenib trial is reported. Patients received vemurafenib 240-1120mg (dose escalation cohort) or 960mg (extension cohort) orally twice daily. Clinical response was evaluated every 8weeks by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST). Patients with PD amenable to local therapy (surgery or radiotherapy) were allowed to continue vemurafenib after progression. Overall survival (OS) from time of treatment initiation and from PD was estimated. Sites of PD were recorded. Forty-eight patients (escalation cohort, n=16; extension cohort, n=32) received therapeutic doses of vemurafenib (⩾240mg twice daily). Forty-four patients had PD by the time of this analysis and four remained progression free (follow-up time, 1.2-56.1months). Median OS was 14months (range, 1.2-56.1); 3- and 4-year melanoma-specific survival rate in the extension cohort was 26% and 19%, respectively. Median OS was 26.0months (range, 7.7-56.1) among 20 patients who continued vemurafenib after local therapy. Median treatment duration beyond initial PD was 3.8months (range, 1.1-26.6). In the extension cohort, six and five patients were alive after 3 and 4years, respectively, on vemurafenib monotherapy. Some patients with melanoma achieved long-term survival with vemurafenib monotherapy. Continuation of vemurafenib after PD might be beneficial in some patients because remaining disease might continue to respond to BRAF inhibition. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 05/2015; 51(11). DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2015.04.010 · 5.42 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: RAF inhibitors are an effective therapy for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma and brain metastasis. Efficacy data are derived from clinical studies enriched with physiologically fit patients; therefore, it is of interest to assess the real-world experience of vemurafenib in this population. Tumor-specific genetic variants that influence sensitivity to RAF kinase inhibitors also require investigation. Records of patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma and brain metastases who were treated with vemurafenib were reviewed. Clinical data were extracted to determine extracranial and intracranial objective response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. A bait-capture, next-generation sequencing assay was used to identify mutations in pretreatment tumors that could explain primary resistance to vemurafenib. Among patients with intracranial disease treated with vemurafenib, 27 were included in survival analyses and 22 patients were assessable for response. The extracranial and intracranial objective response rates were 71% and 50%, respectively. Discordant responses were observed between extracranial and intracranial metastatic sites in 4 of 19 evaluable patients. Median PFS was 4.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.6-7.9); median intracranial PFS was 4.6 months (95% CI: 2.7-7.9), median OS was 7.5 months (95% CI: 4.3-not reached), with a 30.4% 1-year OS rate. Outcomes were influenced by performance status. Vemurafenib was tolerable, although radiation-induced dermatitis occurred in some patients who received whole-brain radiotherapy. Adequate samples for next-generation sequencing analysis were available for seven patients. Melanomas categorized as "poorly sensitive" (≥20% tumor growth, new lesions, or ≤50% shrinkage for <4 months) harbored co-occurring mutations in genes predicted to activate the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-AKT (PI3K-AKT) pathway. Vemurafenib is highly active in BRAF-mutant melanoma brain metastases but has limited activity in patients with poor performance status. The safety and efficacy of concurrent radiotherapy and RAF inhibition requires careful clinical evaluation. Combination strategies blocking the MAPK and PI3K-AKT pathway may be warranted in a subset of patients. ©AlphaMed Press.
    The Oncologist 05/2015; 20(7). DOI:10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0012 · 4.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A central mechanism of tumour progression and metastasis involves the generation of an immunosuppressive 'macroenvironment' mediated in part through tumour-secreted factors. Here we demonstrate that upregulation of the Inhibitor of Differentiation 1 (Id1), in response to tumour-derived factors, such as TGFβ, is responsible for the switch from dendritic cell (DC) differentiation to myeloid-derived suppressor cell expansion during tumour progression. Genetic inactivation of Id1 largely corrects the myeloid imbalance, whereas Id1 overexpression in the absence of tumour-derived factors re-creates it. Id1 overexpression leads to systemic immunosuppression by downregulation of key molecules involved in DC differentiation and suppression of CD8 T-cell proliferation, thus promoting primary tumour growth and metastatic progression. Furthermore, advanced melanoma patients have increased plasma TGFβ levels and express higher levels of ID1 in myeloid peripheral blood cells. This study reveals a critical role for Id1 in suppressing the anti-tumour immune response during tumour progression and metastasis.
    Nature Communications 04/2015; 6:6840. DOI:10.1038/ncomms7840 · 11.47 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Paul B Chapman · Sandra P D'Angelo · Jedd D Wolchok ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To the Editor: Both ipilimumab(1) (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 monoclonal antibody) and nivolumab(2) (anti-programmed death 1 monoclonal antibody) have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of metastatic melanoma on the basis of increased progression-free and overall survival. A phase 1 trial of a combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab showed that 53% of patients had at least 80% tumor shrinkage.(3) We currently have treated 13 patients with melanoma with this combination as part of an expanded-access program ( number, NCT02186249), and we have observed a remarkable tumor response in 1 patient. The patient is a 49-year-old . . .
    New England Journal of Medicine 04/2015; 372(21). DOI:10.1056/NEJMc1501894 · 55.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: Although durable responses can be achieved with tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as imatinib in melanomas harboring KIT mutations, the efficacy of alternative inhibitors after progression to imatinib and the activity of these agents on brain metastases is unknown. Experimental Design: We conducted a phase II study of nilotinib 400 mg BID in two cohorts of patients with melanomas harboring KIT mutations or amplification: A) those refractory or intolerant to a prior KIT inhibitor; and B) those with brain metastases. The primary endpoint was 4-month disease control rate. Secondary endpoints included response rate, time-to-progression and overall survival. A Simon two-stage and a single-stage design was planned to assess for the primary endpoint in Cohorts A and B, respectively. Results: Twenty patients were enrolled and 19 treated (11-Cohort A; 8-Cohort B). Three patients on Cohort A (27%; 95% CI, 8% - 56%) and 1 on Cohort B (12.5%; 90% CI, 0.6% - 47%) achieved the primary endpoint. Two partial responses were observed in Cohort A (18.2%, 90% CI, 3% - 47%); none were observed in Cohort B. The median time-to-progression and overall survival was 3·3 (90% CI, 2.1 - 3.9 months) and 9.1 months (90% CI, 4.3 - 14.2 months), respectively, in all treated patients. Conclusion: Nilotinib may achieve disease control in patients with melanoma harboring KIT alterations and whose disease progressed after imatinib therapy. The efficacy of this agent in KIT altered melanoma with brain metastasis is limited. Copyright © 2015, American Association for Cancer Research.
    Clinical Cancer Research 02/2015; 21(10). DOI:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1630 · 8.72 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The use of BRAF inhibitors may lead to the development of cutaneous toxicities such as rashes, photosensitivity, alopecia, palmoplantar erythrodysesthesia, and proliferative skin lesions, including keratoacanthomas (KAs) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (cuSCCs). The latter are noteworthy for their potential to exhibit malignant features, and they may necessitate invasive treatment. Their prompt identification is of primary importance for directing supportive care efforts and maintaining dose intensity while minimizing the morbidity associated with supportive care interventions. Because such lesions are less familiar to oncologists, this study was designed to characterize their clinico-morphological features, which have not been hitherto described. Methods: The clinical and dermoscopic characteristics and risk factors of new-onset proliferative skin lesions (benign verrucous lesions and KAs/cuSCCs) developing after the initiation of treatment with vemurafenib, dabrafenib, and XL281 were analyzed; the histopathological diagnoses were ascertained. Results: The majority of the lesions were benign verrucous lesions (78%, n = 87), whereas KAs/cuSCCs represented 22% (n = 25). The median times to biopsy for the initial verrucous lesions and KAs/cuSCCs were 4.8 and 10.5 weeks, respectively. The clinico-morphological features significant for KAs/cuSCCs included a larger size (P < .001), a nodular appearance (P < .001), a central keratin plug (P < .001), a central ulceration or crust (P = .04), an adherent scale (P = .02), an erythematous halo (P = .03), and a scaly ring (collarette; P < .001) at the periphery. Conclusions: Our findings represent the first detailed description of the clinico-morphological characteristics that permit distinction between the benign and malignant skin lesions induced by BRAF inhibitors. They are valuable for the recognition of lesions that require intervention and/or a dermatology referral versus those that permit provisional monitoring.
    Cancer 01/2015; 121(1). DOI:10.1002/cncr.28980 · 4.89 Impact Factor
  • Paul B Chapman · David B Solit · Neal Rosen ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In BRAF V600E melanoma patients, RAF inhibitor treatment causes a MEK-inhibitor-sensitive, RAF-inhibitor-resistant adaptive reactivation of ERK signaling. In clinical trials combining MEK and RAF inhibitors, therapeutic efficacy was modestly enhanced, suggesting the utility of inhibiting feedback-reactivated pathways. Strategies for optimally inhibiting ERK signaling should be explored. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Cancer cell 11/2014; 26(5):603-604. DOI:10.1016/j.ccell.2014.10.017 · 23.52 Impact Factor
  • Jaroslaw Jedrych · Paul B. Chapman · Melissa Pulitzer ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: No abstract is available for this article.
    Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft 08/2014; 12(8). DOI:10.1111/ddg.12327_suppl · 2.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Immunomodulatory antibodies that enhance the immune system to fight cancer are revolutionizing the treatment of patients with an expanding variety of malignancies. There is a unique spectrum of side effects associated with immunomodulatory antibodies, termed immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which include colitis and hepatitis among others. The treatment of refractory or severe irAEs can occasionally require significant immunosuppression, involving steroids or tumor necrosis factor-alpha antagonists, placing these patients at risk for infections. We present the first reported case to our knowledge of an opportunistic infection in a patient treated with an immunomodulatory antibody. As the use of immunomodulatory antibodies expands and more patients develop irAEs that require treatment with immunosuppression, recognition of the potential for opportunistic infections in this emerging patient population will be critical. Prospective trials are needed to define the optimal immunosuppressive management of irAEs and determine whether prophylactic antiviral, antibacterial, or antifungal therapies are beneficial in this unique population.
    06/2014; 2(1):19. DOI:10.1186/2051-1426-2-19
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Uveal melanoma is characterized by mutations in GNAQ and GNA11, resulting in mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway activation.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 06/2014; 311(23):2397-405. DOI:10.1001/jama.2014.6096 · 35.29 Impact Factor
  • Jaroslaw Jedrych · Paul B. Chapman · Melissa Pulitzer ·

    Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft 06/2014; 12(8). DOI:10.1111/ddg.12327 · 2.05 Impact Factor
  • Paul B Chapman · Axel Hauschild · Vernon K Sondak ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An estimated 76,100 patients will be diagnosed with invasive melanoma in the United States in 2014, and 9,710 patients will die from the disease. In almost all cases, the cause of death is related to the development of widespread metastatic disease. Although death rates from most types of cancer have steadily decreased in the United States -a 20% decrease during two decades from a peak of 215.1 deaths per 100,000 population in 1991 to 171.8 in 2010 -death rates from melanoma have steadily increased during the same time, especially among males. The news regarding melanoma is far from all bad. Increases in our understanding of the human immune system have led to the development of new immunotherapeutic drugs such as ipilimumab, which has been shown to improve survival in phase III trials in metastatic melanoma, and anti-programmed death 1 (anti-PD1) antibodies, recently hailed by ASCO as one of the past year's most noteworthy clinical cancer advances. However, no discovery has influenced and, indeed, transformed the management of metastatic melanoma more than the identifıcation of activating mutations in the BRAF gene in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway, which occur in about half of cutaneous melanomas and can be targeted with small molecule inhibitors of the BRAF protein, the downstream MEK protein, or both. This article will address how patients with metastatic melanoma are evaluated for their mutation status and how the presence of a targetable mutation influences therapeutic decisions regarding systemic therapy and even surgery.
    05/2014; 34:e412-21. DOI:10.14694/EdBook_AM.2014.34.e412
  • Paul B Chapman ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In recent years the expectation related to treating patients with metastatic melanoma has changed. Three years ago, a diagnosis of metastatic melanoma was bleak; only a small number of patients would benefit from standard treatment and the reason for treatment benefit was often unknown, leaving physicians with limited options to help their patients. Today, just 3 years later, there are proven therapies that allow physicians to expect to shrink tumors and extend the lives of their patients after diagnosis. In this article, Paul B. Chapman, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, summarizes the recent advances in the field of metastatic melanoma and looks ahead to topics such as focusing on specificity, shutting down the ERK pathway, intermittent dosing, discovering driver mutations, individualizing checkpoint inhibition, and identifying rejection antigens to identify what should occur next in order to continue to improve outcomes for a larger population of patients with metastatic melanoma. Dr. Chapman's paper reminds us of the exciting progress that has been made while focusing on the work that is left in the field. Dr. Chapman is a physician-scientist who specializes in diagnosing and treating melanoma that has metastasized to other parts of the body. Dr. Chapman led a clinical trial that paved the way, in part, to the approval of vemurafenib-a drug that targets a BRAF mutation that is present in approximately 50% of patients with metastatic melanoma. Dr. Chapman is one of five Memorial Sloan Kettering scientists to be appointed to a melanoma "Dream Team" that focuses on identifying potential therapies for metastatic melanoma patients who do not have the mutated form of the BRAF gene. Dr. Chapman is also a professor of medicine at the Weill Cornell Medical College and is the chair of the Melanoma Research Alliance Medical Advisory Board. In addition to the above, Dr. Chapman is a sought-after mentor for medical oncology fellows and has a current research interest in identifying novel means to more durably block signaling in the MAPK pathway in melanoma cells. Jedd Wolchok, MD, PhD, Scientific Program Committee Chair.
    05/2014; 34:16-9. DOI:10.14694/EdBook_AM.2014.34.16
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Vemurafenib, a RAF inhibitor, extends survival in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma but activates ERK signaling in RAS-mutant cells. In a patient with a BRAFV600K-mutant melanoma responding to vemurafenib, we observed accelerated progression of a previously unrecognized NRAS-mutant leukemia. We hypothesized that combining vemurafenib with a MEK inhibitor would inhibit ERK activation in the melanoma and prevent ERK activation by vemurafenib in the leukemia and thus suppress both malignancies. We demonstrate that intermittent administration of vemurafenib led to a near-complete remission of the melanoma and the addition of the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib (GDC-0973) caused suppression of vemurafenib-induced leukemic proliferation and ERK activation. Anti-melanoma and anti-leukemia response have been maintained for nearly 20 months as documented by serial measurements of tumor-derived DNA in plasma in addition to conventional radiographic and clinical assessments of response. These data support testing of intermittent ERK pathway inhibition in the therapy of both RAS-mutant leukemia and BRAF-mutant melanoma.
    Cancer Discovery 03/2014; 4(5). DOI:10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-1038 · 19.45 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

11k Citations
1,525.73 Total Impact Points


  • 1991-2015
    • Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
      • Department of Medicine
      New York City, New York, United States
  • 2014
    • Weill Cornell Medical College
      New York, New York, United States
  • 1993-2014
    • Cornell University
      • Department of Medicine
      Итак, New York, United States
  • 2011
    • International Prevention Research Institute
      Lyons, Rhône-Alpes, France
  • 2010
    • Yale University
      New Haven, Connecticut, United States