Tumor Homogeneity between Primary and Metastatic Sites for BRAF Status in Metastatic Melanoma Determined by Immunohistochemical and Molecular Testing

BRAF inhibitors have demonstrated improvement of overall survival in patients with metastatic melanoma and BRAF^V600 mutations. In order to evaluate BRAF tumor heterogeneity between primary and metastatic site, we have evaluated the performance of immunohistochemistry (IHC) with an anti-BRAF^V600E antibody in both localization by comparison with high resolution melting analysis followed by Sanger sequencing in a parallel blinded study. A total of 230 samples distributed as primary melanoma (n = 88) and different types of metastatic samples (n = 142) were studied in 99 patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma (stage III or IV). The prevalence of each BRAF mutation was c.1799T>A, BRAF^V600E (45.2%), c.1799_1800TG>AA, BRAF^V600E2 (3.0%), c.1798_1799GT>AA, BRAF^V600K (3.0%), c.1801 A>G, BRAF^K601E (1.3%), c.1789_1790CT>TC, BRAF^L597S (0.4%), c.1780G>A, BRAF^D594N (0.9%) respectively. IHC was positive in 109/112 samples harboring BRAF^V600E/E2 mutations and negative in other cases. The cytoplasmic staining was either strongly positive in tumor cells of BRAF^V600E mutated cases. It appeared strong brown, different from the vesicular grey cytoplasmic pigmentation of melanophages. Concordance between the two techniques was 96.4%. Sensitivity of IHC for detecting the BRAF^V600E/E2 mutations was 97.3%, while specificity was 100%. Both our IHC and molecular study demonstrated homogeneity between primary and metastatic sites for BRAF status in melanoma. This study also provides evidence that IHC may be a cost-effective first-line method for BRAF^V600E detection. Thereafter, molecular techniques should be used in negative, ambiguous or non-contributive cases.     

Intra- and inter-tumor heterogeneity of BRAF(V600E))mutations in primary and metastatic melanoma

The rationale for using small molecule inhibitors of oncogenic proteins as cancer therapies depends, at least in part, on the assumption that metastatic tumors are primarily clonal with respect to mutant oncogene. With the emergence of BRAF^V600E as a therapeutic target, we investigated intra- and inter-tumor heterogeneity in melanoma using detection of the BRAF^V600E mutation as a marker of clonality. BRAF mutant-specific PCR (MS-PCR) and conventional sequencing were performed on 112 tumors from 73 patients, including patients with matched primary and metastatic specimens (n = 18). Nineteen patients had tissues available from multiple metastatic sites. Mutations were detected in 36/112 (32%) melanomas using conventional sequencing, and 85/112 (76%) using MS-PCR. The better sensitivity of the MS-PCR to detect the mutant BRAF^V600E allele was not due to the presence of contaminating normal tissue, suggesting that the tumor was comprised of subclones of differing BRAF genotypes. To determine if tumor subclones were present in individual primary melanomas, we performed laser microdissection and mutation detection via sequencing and BRAF^V600E-specific SNaPshot analysis in 9 cases. Six of these cases demonstrated differing proportions of BRAF^V600Eand BRAF^wild-type cells in distinct microdissected regions within individual tumors. Additional analyses of multiple metastatic samples from individual patients using the highly sensitive MS-PCR without microdissection revealed that 5/19 (26%) patients had metastases that were discordant for the BRAF^V600E mutation. In conclusion, we used highly sensitive BRAF mutation detection methods and observed substantial evidence for heterogeneity of the BRAF^V600E mutation within individual melanoma tumor specimens, and among multiple specimens from individual patients. Given the varied clinical responses of patients to BRAF inhibitor therapy, these data suggest that additional studies to determine possible associations between clinical outcomes and intra- and inter-tumor heterogeneity could prove fruitful.     

SHOC2 and CRAF Mediate ERK1/2 Reactivation in Mutant NRAS-mediated Resistance to RAF Inhibitor

ERK1/2 signaling is frequently dysregulated in tumors through BRAF mutation. Targeting mutant BRAF with vemurafenib frequently elicits therapeutic responses; however, durable effects are often limited by ERK1/2 pathway reactivation via poorly defined mechanisms. We generated mutant BRAF^V600E melanoma cells that exhibit resistance to PLX4720, the tool compound for vemurafenib, that co-expressed mutant (Q61K) NRAS. In these BRAF^V600E/NRAS^Q61K co-expressing cells, re-activation of the ERK1/2 pathway during PLX4720 treatment was dependent on NRAS. Expression of mutant NRAS in parental BRAF^V600 cells was sufficient to by-pass PLX4720 effects on ERK1/2 signaling, entry into S phase and susceptibility to apoptosis in a manner dependent on the RAF binding site in NRAS. ERK1/2 activation in BRAF^V600E/NRAS^Q61K cells required CRAF only in the presence of PLX4720, indicating a switch in RAF isoform requirement. Both ERK1/2 activation and resistance to apoptosis of BRAF^V600E/NRAS^Q61K cells in the presence of PLX4720 was modulated by SHOC-2/Sur-8 expression, a RAS-RAF scaffold protein. These data show that NRAS mutations confer resistance to RAF inhibitors in mutant BRAF cells and alter RAF isoform and scaffold molecule requirements to re-activate the ERK1/2 pathway.     

Metabolic stress regulates ERK activity by controlling KSR‐RAF heterodimerization

Altered cell metabolism is a hallmark of cancer, and targeting specific metabolic nodes is considered an attractive strategy for cancer therapy. In this study, we evaluate the effects of metabolic stressors on the deregulated ERK pathway in melanoma cells bearing activating mutations of the NRAS or BRAF oncogenes. We report that metabolic stressors promote the dimerization of KSR proteins with CRAF in NRAS‐mutant cells, and with oncogenic BRAF in BRAF^V600E‐mutant cells, thereby enhancing ERK pathway activation. Despite this similarity, the two genomic subtypes react differently when a higher level of metabolic stress is induced. In NRAS‐mutant cells, the ERK pathway is even more stimulated, while it is strongly downregulated in BRAF^V600E‐mutant cells. We demonstrate that this is caused by the dissociation of mutant BRAF from KSR and is mediated by activated AMPK. Both types of ERK regulation nevertheless lead to cell cycle arrest. Besides studying the effects of the metabolic stressors on ERK pathway activity, we also present data suggesting that for efficient therapies of both genomic melanoma subtypes, specific metabolic targeting is necessary.     

Routine multiplex mutational profiling of melanomas enables enrollment in genotype-driven therapeutic trials

Purpose

Knowledge of tumor mutation status is becoming increasingly important for the treatment of cancer, as mutation-specific inhibitors are being developed for clinical use that target only sub-populations of patients with particular tumor genotypes. Melanoma provides a recent example of this paradigm. We report here development, validation, and implementation of an assay designed to simultaneously detect 43 common somatic point mutations in 6 genes (BRAF, NRAS, KIT, GNAQ, GNA11, and CTNNB1) potentially relevant to existing and emerging targeted therapies specifically in melanoma.

Methods

The test utilizes the SNaPshot method (multiplex PCR, multiplex primer extension, and capillary electrophoresis) and can be performed rapidly with high sensitivity (requiring 5–10% mutant allele frequency) and minimal amounts of DNA (10–20 nanograms). The assay was validated using cell lines, fresh-frozen tissue, and formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissue. Clinical characteristics and the impact on clinical trial enrollment were then assessed for the first 150 melanoma patients whose tumors were genotyped in the Vanderbilt molecular diagnostics lab.

Results

Directing this test to a single disease, 90 of 150 (60%) melanomas from sites throughout the body harbored a mutation tested, including 57, 23, 6, 3, and 2 mutations in BRAF, NRAS, GNAQ, KIT, and CTNNB1, respectively. Among BRAF V600 mutations, 79%, 12%, 5%, and 4% were V600E, V600K, V600R, and V600M, respectively. 23 of 54 (43%) patients with mutation harboring metastatic disease were subsequently enrolled in genotype-driven trials.

Conclusion

We present development of a simple mutational profiling screen for clinically relevant mutations in melanoma. Adoption of this genetically-informed approach to the treatment of melanoma has already had an impact on clinical trial enrollment and prioritization of therapy for patients with the disease.     

Prevalence of class I–III BRAF mutations among 114,662 cancer patients in a large genomic database

BRAF mutations are relatively common in many cancers, particularly melanoma, colorectal cancer, and thyroid cancer and to a lesser extent in lung cancer. These mutations can be targeted by BRAF and MEK inhibitors, which exhibit good clinical activity. There are conflicting reports of the various relative rates of BRAF Class I mutations (V600 locus), defined as those that exhibit extremely strong kinase activity by stimulating monomeric activation of BRAF, Class II, define as non-V600 mutations that activate BRAF to signal as a RAS-independent dimer, and Class III mutations, defined as “kinase-dead” with low kinase activity as compared to wild type BRAF. Prospective studies have largely focused on patients with tumors harboring Class I BRAF mutations (limited to the V600 locus) where response rates up to 70% with BRAF plus MEK inhibition have been demonstrated. We report on the relative prevalence of various types of BRAF mutations across human cancers in a cohort of 114,662 patients that received comprehensive genomic profiling using next-generation sequencing. Of these patients, 4517 (3.9%) a pathogenic or presumed pathogenic BRAF mutation (3.9%). Of these, 1271 were seen in melanoma, representing 39.7% of all melanomas sequenced, representing the highest rate in all tumors. Class I (V600) mutations were seen overall in 2841 patients (62.1% of BRAF mutations, 2.4% of total cancers). Class II mutations were seen in 746 tumors (16.5% of BRAF mutant, 0.7% of total), and Class III mutations were seen in 801 tumors (17.7% of BRAF, 0.7% of total). Knowledge of the relative prevalence of these types of mutations can aid in the development of agents that might better address non-V600 mutations in cancer.Impact statementThese data represent the largest aggregation of BRAF mutations within a single clinical database to our knowledge. The relative proportions of both BRAF V600 mutations and non-V600 mutations are informative in all cancers and by malignancy, and can serve as a definitive gold-standard for BRAF mutation cancer incidence by malignancy. The rate of BRAF mutation in human cancer in a real-world large database is lower than previously reported likely representing testing more broadly across tumor types. The relative percentages of Class II and Class III BRAF mutations are higher than previously reported, representing almost 35% of BRAF mutations in cancer. These findings provide support for the development of effective treatments for non-V600 BRAF mutations in cancer.     

Novel Somatic Mutations to PI3K Pathway Genes in Metastatic Melanoma

Background

BRAF^V600 inhibitors have offered a new gateway for better treatment of metastatic melanoma. However, the overall efficacy of BRAF^V600 inhibitors has been lower than expected in clinical trials, and many patients have shown resistance to the drug’s effect. We hypothesized that somatic mutations in the Phosphoinositide 3-Kinase (PI3K) pathway, which promotes proliferation and survival, may coincide with BRAF^V600 mutations and contribute to chemotherapeutic resistance.

Methods

We performed a somatic mutation profiling study using the 454 FLX pyrosequencing platform in order to identify candidate cancer genes within the MAPK and PI3K pathways of melanoma patients. Somatic mutations of theses candidate cancer genes were then confirmed using Sanger sequencing.

Results

As expected, BRAF^V600 mutations were seen in 51% of the melanomas, whereas NRAS mutations were seen in 19% of the melanomas. However, PI3K pathway mutations, though more heterogeneous, were present in 41% of the melanoma, with PTEN being the highest mutated PI3K gene in melanomas (22%). Interestingly, several novel PI3K pathway mutations were discovered in MTOR, IRS4, PIK3R1, PIK3R4, PIK3R5, and NFKB1. PI3K pathway mutations co-occurred with BRAF^V600 mutations in 17% of the tumors and co-occurred with 9% of NRAS mutant tumors, implying cooperativity between these pathways in terms of melanoma progression.

Conclusions

These novel PI3K pathway somatic mutations could provide alternative survival and proliferative pathways for metastatic melanoma cells. They therefore may be potential chemotherapeutic targets for melanoma patients who exhibit resistance to BRAF^V600 inhibitors.     

Inhibition of both BRAF and MEK in BRAFV600E mutant melanoma restores compromised dendritic cell (DC) function while having differential direct effects on DC properties

Purpose

Dendritic cells (DCs) can induce strong tumor-specific T-cell immune responses. Constitutive upregulation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway by a BRAF^V600 mutation, which is present in about 50 % of metastatic melanomas, may be linked to compromised function of DCs in the tumor microenvironment. Targeting both MEK and BRAF has shown efficacy in BRAF^V600 mutant melanoma.

Methods

We co-cultured monocyte-derived human DCs with melanoma cell lines pretreated with the MEK inhibitor U0126 or the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. Cytokine production (IL-12 and TNF-α) and surface marker expression (CD80, CD83, and CD86) in DCs matured with the Toll-like receptor 3/Melanoma Differentiation-Associated protein 5 agonist polyI:C was examined. Additionally, DC function, viability, and T-cell priming capacity were assessed upon direct exposure to U0126 and vemurafenib.

Results

Cytokine production and co-stimulation marker expression were suppressed in polyI:C-matured DCs exposed to melanoma cells in co-cultures. This suppression was reversed by MAPK blockade with U0126 and/or vemurafenib only in melanoma cell lines carrying a BRAF^V600E mutation. Furthermore, when testing the effect of U0126 directly on DCs, marked inhibition of function, viability, and DC priming capacity was observed. In contrast, vemurafenib had no effect on DC function across a wide range of dose concentrations.

Conclusions

BRAF^V600E mutant melanoma cells modulate DC through the MAPK pathway as its blockade can reverse suppression of DC function. MEK inhibition negatively impacts DC function and viability if applied directly. In contrast, vemurafenib does not have detrimental effects on important functions of DCs and may therefore be a superior candidate for combination immunotherapy approaches in melanoma patients.     

Cotargeting histone deacetylases and oncogenic BRAF synergistically kills human melanoma cells by necrosis independently of RIPK1 and RIPK3

Past studies have shown that histone deacetylase (HDAC) and mutant BRAF (v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1) inhibitors synergistically kill melanoma cells with activating mutations in BRAF. However, the mechanism(s) involved remains less understood. Here, we report that combinations of HDAC and BRAF inhibitors kill BRAF^V600E melanoma cells by induction of necrosis. Cotreatment with the HDAC inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) or panobinostat (LBH589) and the BRAF inhibitor PLX4720 activated the caspase cascade, but caspases appeared dispensable for killing, in that inhibition of caspases did not invariably block induction of cell death. The majority of dying cells acquired propidium iodide positivity instantly when they became positive for Annexin V, suggesting induction of necrosis. This was supported by caspase-independent release of high-mobility group protein B1, and further consolidated by rupture of the plasma membrane and loss of nuclear and cytoplasmic contents, as manifested by transmission electron microscopic analysis. Of note, neither the necrosis inhibitor necrostatin-1 nor the small interference RNA (siRNA) knockdown of receptor-interacting protein kinase 3 (RIPK3) inhibited cell death, suggesting that RIPK1 and RIPK3 do not contribute to induction of necrosis by combinations of HDAC and BRAF inhibitors in BRAF^V600E melanoma cells. Significantly, SAHA and the clinically available BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib cooperatively inhibited BRAF^V600E melanoma xenograft growth in a mouse model even when caspase-3 was inhibited. Taken together, these results indicate that cotreatment with HDAC and BRAF inhibitors can bypass canonical cell death pathways to kill melanoma cells, which may be of therapeutic advantage in the treatment of melanoma.     

Discovery and Pharmacophore Studies of Novel Pyrazole‐Based Anti‐Melanoma Agents

Due to the rising incidence and lack of effective treatments, malignant melanoma is the most dangerous form of skin cancer, so that new treatment strategies are urgently needed. Several recent developments indicate that the V600E mutant BRAF (BRAF^V600E) is a validated target for antimelanoma‐drug development. Based on in silico screening results, a series of novel pyrazole derivatives has been designed, synthesized, and evaluated in vitro for their inhibitory activities against BRAF^V600E melanoma cells. Compound 3d exhibited the most potent inhibitory activity with an IC₅₀ value of 0.63 μM for BRAF^V600E and a GI₅₀ value of 0.61 μM for mutant BRAF‐dependent cells. Furthermore, the QSAR modeling and the docking simulation of inhibitor analogs provide important pharmacophore clues for further structural optimization.     

UV and melanoma: the TP53 link

Ultraviolet radiation (UVR) is a major risk factor for melanoma development, but it has been unclear exactly how UVR leads to melanomagenesis. In a recent publication in Nature, Viros et al. identify TP53/Trp53 as a UVR-target gene in melanoma and show that UVR-induced TP53/Trp53 mutations accelerate BRAF(V600E)-driven melanomagenesis.Melanoma is the deadliest skin cancer, and its incidence has relentlessly increased over recent decades. According to the American Cancer Society''s estimates for melanoma in the United States for 2014, about 76 100 new melanomas will be diagnosed and about 9 710 people are expected to die from melanoma. It is well known that UVR is the major environmental factor contributing to melanomagenesis¹. This suggests that there is at least a component of melanoma risk which may be preventable through UVR protective strategies — an issue of immense public health importance due to the availability of sunblocks and sun-safe behaviors. Importantly, while many studies have been conducted to elucidate the link between UVR and melanoma, the precise molecular mechanism(s) by which UVR triggers melanoma formation have remained incompletely understood.Recently, a powerful UVR-induced skin inflammatory response has been shown to provoke metastasis of melanoma² and the presence of UV signature mutations has also been reported throughout the melanoma exome, including recurrent melanoma genes such as RAC1, PPP6C, and STK19^3,4. Previous mouse models for UVR-induced melanoma revealed that UVR-induced inflammation promoted melanomagenesis in neonatal mice^5,6,7. These studies underlined UVR''s significant contribution to melanoma formation. In a recent study published in Nature, Viros et al.⁸ address the role of UVR in previously established BRAF(V600E)-expressing melanocytes in vivo, and demonstrate that significantly accelerated melanoma formation often associated with mutations in TP53/Trp53. To mimic both somatic mutation acquisition and mild sunburn in humans, BRAF(V600E) was expressed at physiological levels in adult mice which were subsequently exposed to repeated low doses of UVR. In addition, certain mice were partially covered with UVR-proof cloth or topically treated with SunSense Milk Sunscreen SPF50 (2.2 mg/cm²) 30 min before UVR exposure, to assess the impact of these protective strategies.UVR was seen to significantly accelerate melanoma formation in mice whose melanocytes express BRAF(V600E), but not in BRAF wild-type mice (which unlike BRAF(V600E)-expressing mice do not develop long latency melanomas independently of UVR). Application of UVR-proof cloth or sunscreen delayed the onset of UVR-driven melanoma and partially prevented acceleration of BRAF(V600E)-driven melanomagenesis by UVR, and sunscreen-protected UVR-exposed BRAF(V600E) mice developed a reduced number of melanomas compared with unprotected UVR-exposed BRAF(V600E) mice (Figure 1). More somatic single nucleotide variants and a significantly higher proportion of C-to-T transitions at the 3′ end of pyrimidine dimers were observed in UVR-exposed melanomas, providing direct evidence of UVR-induced DNA damage. In addition, Trp53 mutations (H39Y, S124F, R245C, R270C, C272G) were detected in UVR-exposed BRAF(V600E) mouse melanomas, indicating a direct role of UVR in the induction of Trp53 mutations in melanoma. The mutated corresponding residues (S127F/S124F, R248C/R245C, R273C/R270C, C275G/C272G) were also identified in TP53 mutations in human melanoma, suggesting that TP53 mutations are linked to evidence of UVR-induced DNA damage in human melanoma. These results are consistent with previous reports that p53 deletion accelerates BRAF(V600E)-driven melanomagenesis both in mice⁹ and in zebrafish¹⁰, but demonstrate the ability of UVR to inflict UV signature mutations within the gene as has been widely observed in non-melanoma skin cancers and also in human melanomas.Open in a separate windowFigure 1A diagram depicting feasible routes of BRAF(V600E)-driven melanomagenesis.This elegant study by Viros et al. clearly helps to establish key roles of UVR in melanomagenesis, and further validates the functional importance of TP53 as a UVR-targeted tumor suppressor gene in a fraction of melanomas. The study also raises several intriguing questions worthy of follow-up analysis. For example, through which mechanism(s) did sunscreen or sunshielding delay but not prevent UVR-induced melanoma? Induction of cutaneous inflammatory changes that are less anatomically restricted to UV irradiated fields, would seem to be an attractive mechanism. This may help to explain the known risk of melanoma in both sun-exposed and less-exposed skin of lightly pigmented people. It is also valuable to better understand the role of UVB vs UVA wavelengths in melanomagenesis. Mechanistically, these distinct regions of the UV spectrum inflict largely distinctive chemical alterations on the genome. Efforts to block UVA as well as UVB in commercial sunscreen products are currently being promoted by the US Food and Drug Administration, a welcome improvement to sun protection strategies. Still, the precise role(s) of UVA in melanomagenesis remain incompletely understood and may involve both cell-autonomous and non-cell-autonomous targets. In addition to the acceleration of BRAF(V600E)-driven melanoma formation by UVR, red pigment (pheomelanin) has also been observed to accelerate BRAF(V600E)-driven melanomagenesis even in the absence of UVR¹¹. Pheomelanin has been identified as an intrinsic risk factor for melanoma with the red pigment itself producing reactive oxygen species that cause DNA damage in the skin, and consequently promote melanomagenesis independently of UVR. UVR likely exacerbates red pigment-induced BRAF(V600E)-driven melanoma, and still remains as a major contributor to melanomagenesis. Therefore, along with UV shielding by sunscreens, further preventative strategies should be investigated to diminish UVR-independent melanoma risk mechanisms.Viros et al. provide intriguing answers to several controversial questions regarding melanomagenesis: Does UVR really trigger melanoma? And can sunscreen actually prevent melanoma? The studies by Viros et al. provide experimental evidence for acceleration of BRAF(V600E)-driven melanoma by UVR-induced TP53/Trp53 mutation and demonstrate that sunscreen delayed but did not completely block UVR-driven melanoma. The current study clearly shows that UVR boosts melanoma and sunscreens may provide partial UVR protection against melanoma — evidence which matches human epidemiologic data. Nevertheless, to protect the public from melanoma, Viros et al. advise that sunscreen should be utilized in combination with additional sun avoidance strategies. In addition, measures that may prevent UV-independent melanoma formation will require additional research and may also be needed in order to optimally battle the incidence of this life-threatening malignancy.     

Focus: Personalized Medicine: Simultaneously Detection of 50 Mutations at 20 Sites in the BRAF and RAS Genes by Multiplexed Single-Nucleotide Primer Extension Assay Using Fine-Needle Aspirates of Thyroid Nodules

Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is commonly used for primary evaluation of thyroid nodules. Twenty to 30 percent of thyroid nodules remain indeterminate after FNA evaluation. Studies show the BRAF p.V600E to be highly specific for papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC), while RAS mutations carry up to 88 percent positive predictive value for malignancy. We developed a two-tube multiplexed PCR assay followed by single-nucleotide primer extension assay for simultaneous detection of 50 mutations in the BRAF (p.V600E, p.K601E/Q) and RAS genes (KRAS and NRAS codons 12, 13, 19, 61 and HRAS 61) using FNA smears of thyroid nodules. Forty-two FNAs and 27 paired formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues were tested. All BRAF p.V600E-positive FNA smears (five) carried a final diagnosis of PTC on resection. RAS mutations were found in benign as well as malignant lesions. Ninety-two percent concordance was observed between FNA and FFPE tissues. In conclusion, our assay is sensitive and reliable for simultaneous detection of multiple BRAF/RAS mutations in FNA smears of thyroid nodules.     

Recurrent BRAF kinase fusions in melanocytic tumors offer an opportunity for targeted therapy

BRAF is the most prevalent oncogene and an important therapeutic target in melanoma. In some cancers, BRAF is activated by rearrangements that fuse its kinase domain to 5′ partner genes. We examined 848 comparative genomic hybridization profiles of melanocytic tumors and found copy number transitions within BRAF in 10 tumors, of which six could be further characterized by sequencing. In all, the BRAF kinase domain was fused in‐frame to six N‐terminal partners. No other mutations were identified in melanoma oncogenes. One of the seven melanoma cell lines without known oncogenic mutations harbored a similar BRAF fusion, which constitutively activated the MAP kinase pathway. Sorafenib, but not vemurafenib, could block MAP kinase pathway activation and proliferation of the cell line at clinically relevant concentrations, whereas BRAF^V600E mutant melanoma cell lines were significantly more sensitive to vemurafenib. The patient from whom the cell line was derived showed a durable clinical response to sorafenib.     

Identification of PLX4032‐resistance mechanisms and implications for novel RAF inhibitors

BRAF inhibitors improve melanoma patient survival, but resistance invariably develops. Here we report the discovery of a novel BRAF mutation that confers resistance to PLX4032 employing whole‐exome sequencing of drug‐resistant BRAF^V600K melanoma cells. We further describe a new screening approach, a genome‐wide piggyBac mutagenesis screen that revealed clinically relevant aberrations (N‐terminal BRAF truncations and CRAF overexpression). The novel BRAF mutation, a Leu505 to His substitution (BRAF^L505H), is the first resistance‐conferring second‐site mutation identified in BRAF mutant cells. The mutation replaces a small nonpolar amino acid at the BRAF‐PLX4032 interface with a larger polar residue. Moreover, we show that BRAF^L505H, found in human prostate cancer, is itself a MAPK‐activating, PLX4032‐resistant oncogenic mutation. Lastly, we demonstrate that the PLX4032‐resistant melanoma cells are sensitive to novel, next‐generation BRAF inhibitors, especially the ‘paradox‐blocker’ PLX8394, supporting its use in clinical trials for treatment of melanoma patients with BRAF‐mutations.     

Detrimental effects of melanocortin‐1 receptor (MC1R) variants on the clinical outcomes of BRAF V600 metastatic melanoma patients treated with BRAF inhibitors

Melanocortin‐1 receptor (MC1R) plays a key role in skin pigmentation, and its variants are linked with a higher melanoma risk. The influence of MC1R variants on the outcomes of patients with metastatic melanoma (MM) treated with BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) is unknown. We studied the MC1R status in a cohort of 53 consecutive BRAF‐mutated patients with MM treated with BRAFi. We also evaluated the effect of vemurafenib in four ^V600BRAF melanoma cell lines with/without MC1R variants. We found a significant correlation between the presence of MC1R variants and worse outcomes in terms of both overall response rate (ORR; 59% versus 95%, P = 0.011 univariate, P = 0.028 multivariate analysis) and progression‐free survival (PFS) shorter than 6 months (72% versus 33%, P = 0.012 univariate, P = 0.027 multivariate analysis). No difference in overall survival (OS) was reported, probably due to subsequent treatments. Data in vitro showed a significant different phosphorylation of Erk1/2 and p38 MAPK during treatment, associated with a greater increase in vemurafenib IC50 in MC1R variant cell lines.     

NRAS and BRAF Mutations in Melanoma-Associated Nevi and Uninvolved Nevi

According to the prevailing multistep model of melanoma development, oncogenic BRAF or NRAS mutations are crucial initial events in melanoma development. It is not known whether melanocytic nevi that are found in association with a melanoma are more likely to carry BRAF or NRAS mutations than uninvolved nevi. By laser microdissection we were able to selectively dissect and genotype cells either from the nevus or from the melanoma part of 46 melanomas that developed in association with a nevus. In 25 cases we also genotyped a control nevus of the same patients. Available tissue was also immunostained using the BRAF^V600E-mutation specific antibody VE1. The BRAF^V600E mutation was found in 63.0% of melanomas, 65.2% of associated nevi and 50.0% of control nevi. No significant differences in the distribution of BRAF or NRAS mutations could be found between melanoma and associated nevi or between melanoma associated nevi and control nevi. In concordant cases immunohistochemistry showed a higher expression (intensity of immunohistochemistry) of the mutated BRAF^V600E-protein in melanomas compared to their associated nevi. In this series the presence of a BRAF- or NRAS mutation in a nevus was not associated with the risk of malignant transformation. Our findings do not support the current traditional model of stepwise tumor progression.     

AEBP1 upregulation confers acquired resistance to BRAF (V600E) inhibition in melanoma

An activating BRAF (V600E) kinase mutation occurs in approximately half of melanomas. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that vemurafenib (PLX4032) and dabrafenib, potent and selective inhibitors of mutant v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF), exhibit remarkable activities in patients with V600 BRAF mutant melanomas. However, acquired drug resistance invariably develops after the initial treatment. Identification of acquired resistance mechanisms may inform the development of new therapies that elicit long-term responses of melanomas to BRAF inhibitors. Here we report that increased expression of AEBP1 (adipocyte enhancer-binding protein 1) confers acquired resistance to BRAF inhibition in melanoma. AEBP1 is shown to be highly upregulated in PLX4032-resistant melanoma cells because of the hyperactivation of the PI3K/Akt-cAMP response element-binding protein (CREB) signaling pathway. This upregulates AEBP1 expression and thus leads to the activation of NF-κB via accelerating IκBa degradation. In addition, inhibition of the PI3K/Akt-CREB-AEBP1-NF-κB pathway greatly reverses the PLX4032-resistant phenotype of melanoma cells. Furthermore, increased expression of AEBP1 is validated in post-treatment tumors in patients with acquired resistance to BRAF inhibitor. Therefore, these results reveal a novel PI3K/Akt-CREB-AEBP1-NF-κB pathway whose activation contributes to acquired resistance to BRAF inhibition, and suggest that this pathway, particularly AEBP1, may represent a novel therapeutic target for treating BRAF inhibitor-resistant melanoma.