Yasser Heakal1, Mark Kester, Scott Savage. 1. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center and North Carolina Cancer Hospital, College of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To summarize the preclinical and clinical data on vemurafenib, approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on August 17, 2011, and discuss the drug's clinical advantages and limitations. DATA SOURCES: An English-language literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed (1966-August 2011), using the terms PLX4032, RG7204, RO5185426, vemurafenib, and metastatic melanoma, was conducted. In addition, information and data were obtained from meeting abstracts, clinical trial registries, and news releases from the FDA. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant published articles and abstracts on vemurafenib were included. Clinical trial registries and meeting abstracts were used to obtain information regarding ongoing trials. All peer-reviewed articles containing information regarding the clinical safety and efficacy of vemurafenib were evaluated for inclusion. DATA SYNTHESIS: Before the recent approval (March 2011) of ipilimumab, there was no first-line standard-of-care therapy, with proven overall survival benefit, for the treatment of malignant metastatic melanoma. Unlike ipilimumab, which acts through immune-modulation, vemurafenib is a novel, molecularly targeted therapeutic with preferential efficacy toward a specific mutated oncogenic BRAF-signaling mediator. In recently published results of a Phase 3 clinical trial comparing dacarbazine with vemurafenib, vemurafenib prolonged progression-free and overall survival, with confirmed objective response rate of 48% (95% CI 42 to 55) versus 5% (95% CI 3 to 9) for patients who received dacarbazine (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Vemurafenib offers a novel, first-line, personalized therapy for patients who have mutated BRAF. Clinical trials of vemurafenib in combination with ipilimumab or other targeted or cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents may provide more effective regimens with long-term clinical benefit.
OBJECTIVE: To summarize the preclinical and clinical data on vemurafenib, approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on August 17, 2011, and discuss the drug's clinical advantages and limitations. DATA SOURCES: An English-language literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed (1966-August 2011), using the terms PLX4032, RG7204, RO5185426, vemurafenib, and metastatic melanoma, was conducted. In addition, information and data were obtained from meeting abstracts, clinical trial registries, and news releases from the FDA. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant published articles and abstracts on vemurafenib were included. Clinical trial registries and meeting abstracts were used to obtain information regarding ongoing trials. All peer-reviewed articles containing information regarding the clinical safety and efficacy of vemurafenib were evaluated for inclusion. DATA SYNTHESIS: Before the recent approval (March 2011) of ipilimumab, there was no first-line standard-of-care therapy, with proven overall survival benefit, for the treatment of malignant metastatic melanoma. Unlike ipilimumab, which acts through immune-modulation, vemurafenib is a novel, molecularly targeted therapeutic with preferential efficacy toward a specific mutated oncogenic BRAF-signaling mediator. In recently published results of a Phase 3 clinical trial comparing dacarbazine with vemurafenib, vemurafenib prolonged progression-free and overall survival, with confirmed objective response rate of 48% (95% CI 42 to 55) versus 5% (95% CI 3 to 9) for patients who received dacarbazine (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Vemurafenib offers a novel, first-line, personalized therapy for patients who have mutated BRAF. Clinical trials of vemurafenib in combination with ipilimumab or other targeted or cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents may provide more effective regimens with long-term clinical benefit.
Authors: Mark R Gray; Sara Martin del Campo; Xu Zhang; Haowei Zhang; Frederico F Souza; William E Carson; Andrew D Smith Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Todd M Pitts; Gillian N Kulikowski; Aik-Choon Tan; Brion W Murray; John J Arcaroli; John J Tentler; Anna Spreafico; Heather M Selby; Maria I Kachaeva; Kelly L McPhillips; Blair C Britt; Erica L Bradshaw-Pierce; Wells A Messersmith; Marileila Varella-Garcia; S Gail Eckhardt Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Mahesh Iddawela; Sarah Crook; Leah George; Amit Lakkaraju; Nihal Nanayakkara; Roland Hunt; William R Adam Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Erica Lynn Bradshaw-Pierce; Todd M Pitts; Aik-Choon Tan; Kelly McPhillips; Mark West; Daniel L Gustafson; Charles Halsey; Leslie Nguyen; Nathan V Lee; Julie L C Kan; Brion William Murray; S Gail Eckhardt Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2013-03-22 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Anna-Maria Bubolz; Stephanie E Weissinger; Albrecht Stenzinger; Annette Arndt; Konrad Steinestel; Silke Brüderlein; Holger Cario; Anneli Lubatschofski; Claudia Welke; Ioannis Anagnostopoulos; Thomas F E Barth; Ambros J Beer; Peter Möller; Martin Gottstein; Andreas Viardot; Jochen K Lennerz Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2014-06-30