Literature DB >> 30867592

Efficacy of MEK inhibition in patients with histiocytic neoplasms.

Eli L Diamond1,2, Benjamin H Durham3,4, Gary A Ulaner2,5, Esther Drill6, Justin Buthorn1, Michelle Ki4, Lillian Bitner4, Hana Cho4, Robert J Young2,5, Jasmine H Francis7, Raajit Rampal2,8, Mario Lacouture2,9, Lynn A Brody5, Neval Ozkaya3,10, Ahmet Dogan3, Neal Rosen2,8,11, Alexia Iasonos2,6, Omar Abdel-Wahab12,13,14, David M Hyman15,16.   

Abstract

Histiocytic neoplasms are a heterogeneous group of clonal haematopoietic disorders that are marked by diverse mutations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway1,2. For the 50% of patients with histiocytosis who have BRAFV600 mutations3-5, RAF inhibition is highly efficacious and has markedly altered the natural history of the disease6,7. However, no standard therapy exists for the remaining 50% of patients who lack BRAFV600 mutations. Although ERK dependence has been hypothesized to be a consistent feature across histiocytic neoplasms, this remains clinically unproven and many of the kinase mutations that are found in patients who lack BRAFV600 mutations have not previously been biologically characterized. Here we show ERK dependency in histiocytoses through a proof-of-concept clinical trial of cobimetinib, an oral inhibitor of MEK1 and MEK2, in patients with histiocytoses. Patients were enrolled regardless of their tumour genotype. In parallel, MAPK alterations that were identified in treated patients were characterized for their ability to activate ERK. In the 18 patients that we treated, the overall response rate was 89% (90% confidence interval of 73-100). Responses were durable, with no acquired resistance to date. At one year, 100% of responses were ongoing and 94% of patients remained progression-free. Cobimetinib treatment was efficacious regardless of genotype, and responses were observed in patients with ARAF, BRAF, RAF1, NRAS, KRAS, MEK1 (also known as MAP2K1) and MEK2 (also known as MAP2K2) mutations. Consistent with the observed responses, the characterization of the mutations that we identified in these patients confirmed that the MAPK-pathway mutations were activating. Collectively, these data demonstrate that histiocytic neoplasms are characterized by a notable dependence on MAPK signalling-and that they are consequently responsive to MEK inhibition. These results extend the benefits of molecularly targeted therapy to the entire spectrum of patients with histiocytosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30867592      PMCID: PMC6438729          DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1012-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


Based on the success of targeting BRAFV600 in the two most common histiocytic neoplasms, Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) and Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD), efforts were undertaken to identify potential genomic drivers of disease in patients that do not harbor this mutation. These genomic studies of histiocytoses have identified a remarkable diversity of both previously characterized as well as novel alterations involving multiple components of the MAPK pathway[8-13]. Interestingly, many of the recurrent mutations in histiocytic neoplasms occur in MAPK pathway genes such as ARAF, RAF1, MEK1, and MEK2 that are rarely, if ever, mutated in other malignancies. Consequently, many of these mutations have not been biologically characterized. Consistent with the underlying hypothesis that these non-BRAFV600 mutations likely drive histiocytic neoplasms, drugs that inhibit both MEK1/2, kinases immediately downstream of BRAF, have been shown in case reports to evoke responses in these patients[14-16]. Despite these findings, the true extent and durability of response, as well as safety of MEK1/2 inhibition across a wider range of histologic and molecular subsets of histiocytosis remains unknown. To formally evaluate the therapeutic potential of MEK1/2 inhibition in histiocytic neoplasms, we conducted a Phase II study of the MEK1/2 inhibitor, cobimetinib, in adult patients with histiocytoses of any mutational status (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02649972). Consistent with common clinical practice for response assessment in these disorders[17-19], the primary endpoint was response rate (complete response + partial response) as determined by fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET). To provide additional corroboration of treatment efficacy, a key secondary end point included response by CT/MRI per RECIST version 1.1[20]. Simultaneously, we utilized this clinical trial as a platform to perform real-time patient-driven discovery of novel MAPK pathway alterations through biological characterization of novel alterations identified through comprehensive profiling of patient samples. A total of 18 patients were enrolled and treated (Extended Data Table 1). Patients had a variety of histiocytic neoplasms including ECD (n=12 patients), LCH (n=2), Rosai-Dorfman disease (n=2), and mixed histiocytosis (n=2). Eighty-nine percent (16/18) of patients had received at least one prior therapy and 56% (10/18) two or more prior therapies. Five patients (28%) had an ECOG performance status of ≥2.
Extended Data Table 1.

Demographic and Clinical Characteristics (N=18)

CharacteristicValue, N (%)
Age, Median (range) year51.9 (18.3–79.5)
Sex
 Male13 (72)
 Female5 (28)
Histiocytosis type
 Erdheim-Chester disease12 (67)
 Rosai-Dorfman disease2 (11)
 Langerhans cell histiocytosis2 (11)
 Mixed histiocytosis2 (11)
Mitogen-activated protein kinase mutation
 BRAF
  V600E4 (22)
  N486_T491delinsK1 (6)
 MEK1
  Q56P1 (6)
  P105_1107del1 (6)
  P124L1 (6)
  P124Q1 (6)
 ARAF
  S225V1 (6)
 RAF1 K106N1 (6)
 MEK2 Y134H1 (6)
 KRAS R149G1 (6)
 >1 mutation
  BRAF V600E; NRAS G12D; KRAS G13C1 (6)
  KRAS G12R; ARAF P216A1 (6)
 Unknown3 (17)
ECOG performance-status score
 05 (28)
 18 (44)
 22 (11)
 33 (17)
Central nervous system involvement
 Yes9 (50)
 No9 (50)
No. of prior systemic therapies
 02 (11)
 16 (33)
 28 (44)
 ≥32 (11)
Prior systemic therapy
 Any prior therapy16 (89)
 Immunosuppression[1]12 (67)
 Cytotoxic chemotherapy[2]9 (50)
 Interferon-alpha5 (28)
 Kinase inhibitor[3]3 (18)

Corticosteroids, anakinra, sirolimus, infliximab, intravenous immunoglobulin, rituximab.

Methotrexate, cytarabine, cladribine, 6-mercaptopurine, vinblastine, lenolidamide, cyclophosphamide, etoposide.

Vemurafenib, dasatinib.

At the time of the pre-planned primary efficacy analysis performed using a data-cutoff of April 25, 2018, the ORR was 89% (90% one-sided confidence interval [CI], 73 to 100), as determined by PET response criteria (Fig. 1a). Overall, 72% of the patients (13 patients) had a complete response, 17% (3) partial response, 6% (1) stable disease, none (0) had progressive disease, and 6% (1) could not be evaluated owing to early withdrawal for clinical deterioration (Extended Data Table 2). All patients were accounted for in the analysis, including the patient who could not be evaluated, per protocol (counted as non-responder). Responses occurred at all sites of disease including the central nervous system, a site associated with morbidity and mortality[21]. According to CT/MRI-based RECIST v1.1 criteria, the ORR was 57% (90% one-sided CI: 37 to 100), in the 14 of 18 patients evaluable by these criteria (Extended Data Fig. 1). The median time to best response according to PET response criteria was 3.2 months (range, 1.6 to 15.9, Fig. 1b). At the time of data analysis, 50% (9/18) of patients remained on protocol therapy, and an additional 17% (3/18), all in complete response, had elected to withdraw and continue to receive MEK inhibitory therapy off-label.
Figure 1:

Efficacy of MEK1/2 inhibition with cobimetinib across molecular subtypes of histiocytoses.

(a) Waterfall plot of the maximum change in tumor metabolism according to standardized uptake values (SUVs) measured by positron emission tomography (PET). Colors of bars indicate genomic alteration present. Notations above bars indicate specific mutation. One patient (dagger) died due to underlying disease prior to first response evaluation. The lower dotted lines represent cut-off for partial response. (b) Swimmer plot of outcomes in all 18 patients. (c) PET-Defined progression-free survival (n=18).

Extended Data Table 2.

Overall Response Rate

ResponsePET Response (N=18)RECIST Response (N=14)
Overall response rate, % (90% one-sided Confidence Interval)89 (73–100)57 (37–100)
Best Response, N (%)
 Complete13 (72)2 (14)
 Partial3 (17)6 (43)
 Stable1 (6)5 (36)
 Progressive0 (0)0 (0)
 Not Evaluable1 (6)1 (7)

Demonstrates the overall response rate, and best response (complete, partial, stable, progressive, non-evaluable) using both PET response criteria and RECIST version 1.1 criteria.

Extended Data Figure 1.

Waterfall plot of maximum change in tumor size by RECIST following cobimetinib treatment in histiocytosis patients (n=14).

The upper and lower dotted lines represent cut-offs for progressive disease and partial response, respectively. Colors of bars indicate genomic alteration present. Notations above bars indicate specific mutation. One patient (asterisk) had prior BRAF inhibitor therapy that was discontinued due to intolerance. One patient (dagger) died due to underlying disease.

The median duration of response and the median progression-free survival had not yet been reached after a median follow up of 11.9 months (range, 4.6 to 26.4) (Fig. 1c, Extended Data Fig. 2). No responding patient has progressed to date. Among those who discontinued treatment for any reason, median time on treatment was 11.9 months (range, 1.6 to 23.7). At one year, 100% of responses were ongoing, and 94% of patients remained progression-free.
Extended Data Figure 2.

PET-Defined Duration of Response (N=16).

Depicts the duration of response according to PET criteria in the 16 responding patients, beginning with date of initial response.

The adverse events observed are shown in Extended Data Table 3-4. Overall, the safety profile was consistent with prior studies of cobimetinib[22,23]. Of the 18 treated patients, 10 (56%) had their cobimetinib dose reduced at least once. Adverse events leading to dose reduction included ejection fraction decrease (in 5 patients), rash (in 2), diarrhea (in 2), and fatigue and thrombocytopenia (in 1 each). In all cases, patients whose doses were reduced had their best response maintained at the lower dose. One patient permanently discontinued cobimetinib due to an adverse event (central retinal vein occlusion). Another patient with extensive baseline histiocytic lung involvement died of pneumonia, deemed unrelated to cobimetinib, prior to first response assessment and was counted as a non-responder per protocol.
Extended Data Table 3.

Safety of cobimetinib in phase 2 study in histiocytosis patients

Grade 1/2(%)Grade 3/4 (%)All (%)
Rash*15 (83)0 (0)15 (83)
Diarrhea11 (61)2 (11)13 (72)
Creatine phosphokinase elevation10 (56)1 (6)11 (61)
Hypomagnesemia10 (56)0 (0)10 (56)
Alkaline phosphatase increased9 (50)0 (0)9 (50)
AST/ALT elevation8 (44)0 (0)8 (44)
Nausea7 (39)0 (0)7 (39)
Anemia4 (22)2 (11)6 (33)
Dry skin5 (28)0 (0)5 (28)
Infection[#]5 (28)0 (0)5 (28)
Vomiting5 (28)0 (0)5 (28)
Abdominal disturbance4 (22)0 (0)4 (22)
Edema limbs4 (22)0 (0)4 (22)
Fatigue4 (22)0 (0)4 (22)
Hyponatremia2 (11)2 (11)4 (22)
Anorexia3 (17)0 (0)3 (17)
Hypoalbuminemia3(17)0(0)3(17)
Hypocalcemia3 (17)0 (0)3 (17)
Pruritus3 (17)0 (0)3 (17)
Serum amylase increased2 (11)1 (6)3 (17)
White blood cell decreased3 (17)0 (0)3 (17)
Hypokalemia0 (0)2 (11)2 (11)
Lipase increased1 (6)1 (6)2 (11)
Lymphocyte count decreased0 (0)1 (6)1 (6)
Retinal vein occlusion0 (0)1 (6)1 (6)

Adverse events listed here are those that were attributed by investigators as related to cobimetinib and occurred in at least 15% of patients, regardless of grade, or of any frequency, for grade ≥3.

Combines the following terms: Rash acneiform, rash maculo-papular.

Combines the following terms: bladder infection, bronchial infection, oral infection, tooth infection, upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infection, infections - other.

Extended Data Table 4.

Safety, Regardless of Attribution

Grade 1/2, N (%)Grade ≥3, N (%)All, N (%)
Hyperglycemia15 (83)1 (6)16 (89)
Infection14 (78)1 (6)15 (83)
Rash15 (83)-15 (83)
Hypoalbuminemia14 (78)-14 (78)
Diarrhea11 (61)2 (11)13 (72)
Anemia9 (50)2 (11)11 (61)
CPK increased10 (56)1 (6)11 (61)
Hypomagnesemia11 (61)-11 (61)
Alkaline phosphatase increased10 (56)-10 (56)
Hypernatremia10 (56)-10 (56)
AST/ALT increased9 (50)1 (6)10 (56)
Platelet count decreased8 (44)2 (11)10 (56)
White blood cell decreased7(39)1 (6)8 (44)
Edema limbs7(39)-7(39)
Hypocalcemia5(28)2 (11)7(39)
Lipase increased5(28)2 (11)7(39)
Nausea7(39)-7(39)
Dry skin6 (33)-6 (33)
Fatigue5(28)-5(28)
Hyperkalemia4(22)1 (6)5(28)
Hypoglycemia5(28)-5(28)
Hyponatremia2 (11)3(17)5(28)
Neutrophil count decreased4(22)1 (6)5(28)
Serum amylase increased4(22)1 (6)5(28)
Vomiting5(28)-5(28)
Blood bilirubin increased4(22)-4(22)
Constipation4(22)-4(22)
Dyspnea3(17)1 (6)4(22)
Gastrointestinal symptoms4(22)-4(22)
Lymphocyte count decreased-4(22)4(22)
Pain3(17)1 (6)4(22)
Anorexia3(17)-3(17)
Creatinine increased3(17)-3(17)
Dry mouth3(17)-3(17)
Hypertriglyceridemia3(17)-3(17)
Hypokalemia1 (6)2 (11)3(17)
INR increased2 (11)1 (6)3(17)
Pruritus3(17)-3(17)

Adverse events listed here are those that occurred in at least 15% of patients, regardless of grade or investigator attribution. Infection combines the following terms: bladder infection, bronchial infection, oral infection, tooth infection, upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infection, infections and infestations - other. Rash combines: rash acneiform, rash maculo-papular.

To identify the MAPK pathway alterations present in each patient, a variety of sequencing assays were performed according to tissue availability (Extended Data Table 5). In some cases, MAPK mutations were defined on the basis of sequencing performed at an outside commercial laboratory. At least one mutation involving the MAPK pathway was identified in 83% (15/18) of patients. Patients harbored a variety of MAPK pathway mutations involving BRAF (n=5 with V600, n=1 with non-V600), MEK1 (n=4), KRAS (n=3), ARAF (n=2), RAF1 (n=1), MEK2 (n=1), and NRAS (n=1). Two patients had mutations involving more than one gene in the MAPK pathway. Three patients had unknown mutational status, including one case in which sequencing of two separate biopsies failed due to low tumor cellularity. Responses were observed across genotypes, as well as in 2 of 3 patients with unknown mutations (Fig. 1a). While several alterations detected here (including several in BRAF, ARAF, and MEK1) are known to be recurrent in histiocytoses, RAF1 mutations have not been previously described in histiocytoses, and the specific RAF1, MEK2, and BRAF indel mutations identified here have not been functionally characterized in any setting (Extended Data Fig. 4). We therefore evaluated the transforming potential, ability to activate ERK, and responsiveness to cobimetinib in vitro for each of these three novel mutations. In each case, the MEK2 Y134H, BRAF N486_T491delinsK, and RAF1 K106N mutations robustly led to cytokine independence in Ba/F3 cells (a murine IL3-dependent, pro-B cell line) and activated ERK signaling while wild-type MEK2, RAF1, and BRAF did not (Fig. 2a-f). Moreover, expression of each mutation sensitized Ba/F3 cells to cobimetinib while parental Ba/F3 cells remained relatively insensitive to cobimetinib (Fig. 2g). These in vitro responses were consistent with the clinical responses seen in patients bearing these same alleles on the trial (Fig. 1a-b and 2a,c,e).
Extended Data Table 5.

Genomic Testing Methodology

Study IDHistiocytosisMAPK Pathway MutationAssays
1ECDARAF S225VWES, TES
2RDDNo mutation identifiedNone
3ECDKRAS R149GWES, TES
4RDDNo mutation identifiedWES, TES, TRS
5ECDBRAF V600EPCR
6ECDBRAF V600ETES, TRS, cfDNA
7ECDBRAF V600EWES, PCR
8ECDBRAF V600EPCR
9LCHBRAF N486_T491delWES, TES, TRS
10Mixed HistiocytosisRAF1 K106NWES, TES, TRS
11Mixed HistiocytosisMEK1 P124LWES, TES, TRS, Sequenom
12ECDMEK1 P124QWES, TES, TRS
13ECDMEK1 Q56PWES, TES
14ECDMEK1 P105_l107delWES, TES
15ECDMEK2 Y134HWES, TES, cfDNA
16ECDKRAS G12R / ARAF P216ATES
17LCHBRAF V600E / NRAS G12D / KRAS G13CTES
18ECDNo mutation identifiedWES, TES

ECD: Erdheim-Chester disease; LCH: Langerhans cell histiocytosis; RDD: Rosai-Dorfman disease; CR: complete response; PR: partial response; SD: stable disease; TES: Targeted Exon Sequencing; TRS: Targeted RNA Sequencing; cfDNA: Cell-Free DNA; PCR; polymerase chain reaction; WES: Whole Exome Sequencing; NE: Not-Evaluable; NA: Not Applicable

Extended Data Figure 4.

Study CONSORT diagram.

Shows the flow of patients through all phases of study participation from enrollment, follow-up, and data analysis.

Figure 2:

Characterization of novel activating mutations in MEK2, RAF1, and BRAF and their dependence on ERK signaling in histiocytoses.

(a) Coronal PET and fused PET/CT imaging of femurs showing characteristic femoral lesions of ECD from a MEK2 Y134H mutant ECD patient pre- and during cobimetinib treatment. (b) Western blot (left) and number of viable cells (right) following IL-3 withdrawal of Ba/F3 cells stably expressing an empty vector, wild-type (WT) MEK2, or MEK2 Y134H mutant (the average of n=3 biological replicates ± standard deviation (SD) is plotted). Calculation of p-values was performed using two-way ANOVA; ****p<0.0001. (c) Axial fused PET/CT imaging showing skull lesions (arrow) pre- and during cobimetinib treatment in a patient with BRAF N486_T491delinsK mutant LCH. (d) Western blot (left) and number of viable cells (right) following IL-3 withdrawal of Ba/F3 cells stably expressing an empty vector, WT BRAF, or BRAF N486_T491delinsK mutant (the average of n=3 biological replicates ± SD is plotted). Calculation of p-values was performed using two-way ANOVA; ****p<0.0001. (e) Axial fused PET/CT imaging showing sacral lesions (arrow) pre-and during cobimetinib treatment in a patient with mixed histiocytosis and a RAF1 K106N mutation. (f) Western blot (left) and number of viable cells (right) following IL-3 withdrawal of Ba/F3 cells stably expressing an empty vector, WT RAF1, or RAF1 K106N mutant (the average of n=3 biological replicates ± SD is plotted). Calculation of p-values was performed using two-way ANOVA; ****p<0.0001. (g) IC50 of cells from (b), (d), and (e) to 72 hours of cobimetinib. Each experiment was performed with n=3 biological replicates and average ± SD is plotted. The calculation of p-values utilized the Ordinary one-way ANOVA; **p <0.01.

In this study, cobimetinib, a selective inhibitor of MEK1/2, had marked and durable activity in adults with histiocytic neoplasms. Responses to cobimetinib were observed across histiocytosis subtypes and tumor genotypes, although consistent with the expectations for a study mandating adult patients to have either refractory or multiorgan disease, ECD constituted the majority (67%) of treated patients. Therefore, some caution is warranted when applying these findings to all patients with histiocytosis. The efficacy of cobimetinib across MAPK genotypes here is remarkable given that single-agent efficacy of MEK1/2 inhibitors in other MAPK pathway altered solid tumors has generally been disappointing[24]. Indeed, prior work has shown that RAS mutations vary in their dependence on MEK1/2[25,26]. Similarly, preclinical studies have previously suggested that several MEK1/2 mutations, including some observed in patients treated here, would confer resistance to MEK1/2 inhibition[27,28]. Importantly, responses to cobimetinib were not only nearly universal but also durable and, in fact, no acquired resistance has been observed to date. This finding suggests that histiocytic neoplasms may lack the ability to adapt to the tonic MEK1/2 inhibition and suggest that cobimetinib may dramatically alter the natural history of these disorders. It is noteworthy that similar efficacy and durability of response was previously observed with vemurafenib in the subset of histiocytic neoplasms that harbor BRAFV600 mutations[6,7]. Overall, our data demonstrate that cobimetinib results in consistent and durable responses across clinical and genetic subtypes of histiocytic neoplasms, an area of unmet medical need. These findings further suggest that histiocytic neoplasms are collectively characterized by dependence on MAPK pathway signaling and, consequently, responsiveness to MEK1/2 inhibition.

Methods

Patients

Eligible patients had a histiocytic neoplasm, were age 16 or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status score of 0 to 3 (on a scale from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability), and had adequate major organ function. Patients were required to have one of the following: (1) multi-system disease, (2) disease that was recurrent or refractory to standard therapies, or (3) single-organ system disease deemed unlikely to benefit from conventional therapies (for example, central nervous system or cardiac infiltration). Patients with tumors that were wild type for BRAF V600 were eligible. Patients with BRAF V600-mutations were eligible only in the setting of (1) intolerance or resistance to prior BRAF inhibitor therapy, or (2) the inability to access BRAF inhibitor therapy. Complete eligibility criteria are available in the study protocol (see Supplemental Information). The protocol was approved by the institutional review board at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, complied with the International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, Good Clinical Practice guidelines, and the Declaration of Helsinki. All patients provided written informed consent.

Study Design and Treatment

The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (CR + PR) by PET response criteria (see Supplementary Information). These criteria were previously utilized for analysis of vemurafenib efficacy in BRAF V600-mutant histiocytic disorders, a dataset that formed the basis of regulatory authorization for this indication in the United States[7]. PET responses were investigator assessed by a radiologist with dual board-certification in diagnostic radiology and nuclear medicine (GU). Secondary endpoints included duration of response and progression-free survival based on PET criteria, safety and response rate according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. Patients received cobimetinib at a starting dose of 60mg daily for 21 days of each 28 day cycle.

Study Assessments

Tumor assessments were performed by means of PET/CT, MRI, or clinical measurement with calipers in the case of cutaneous lesions, at baseline, every 8 weeks for 6 months, and every 16 weeks thereafter until disease progression. Adverse events were assessed from the date that informed consent was obtained until at least 28 days after the last dose of cobimetinib was administered. Adverse events were classified and graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0 (https://evs.nci.nih.gov/ftp1/CTCAE/About.html).

Study Oversight

The study was designed jointly by the first and last authors. The investigators collected and analyzed the data. All authors had access to the data, and the first and last authors wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All the authors were involved in the data analysis and manuscript preparation. All the authors vouch for the completeness and accuracy of the data and analyses and for the adherence to the study protocols. All the authors made the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Data, safety, and quality monitoring were performed by the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Data and Safety Monitoring Committee. All data elements were de-identified by removing identifying characteristics and replacing them with code numbers 1 through 18.

Statistical Analysis

All the analyses were conducted in accordance with the pre-specified statistical plan as outlined in the protocol unless otherwise indicated (see Supplementary Information). The primary analysis, presented here, was performed at the time the first 18 consecutively enrolled patients to receive cobimetinib were evaluable for response or discontinued protocol therapy (Extended Data Fig. 4). Patients who discontinued therapy without a post-baseline tumor assessment were considered to be non-responders. Assuming a binary endpoint of PET response (complete response or partial response versus neither), we estimated that a sample of 18 patients would provide the study with 90% power to test the hypothesis that the response rate is promising (defined as 35% or higher) against a non-promising rate of 10% or lower. Using an exact, one-sample test for binomial proportion, with Type I error=10% and Type II error=10%, the above rates provided a sample size of 18 patients; if at least 4/18 responses were observed then this would be considered a positive study (i.e. conclude that the true response rate is >10%). Ruling out a lower limit of 10% for the overall response rate was considered to be clinically meaningful in light of the poor response to treatment in the context of multi-system or refractory histiocytosis. Secondary end points included overall response rate according to RECIST version 1.1 and duration of response and progression-free survival (PFS) based on PET criteria as estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Duration of response was defined beginning with the date of response and ending with the date of progression, beginning of an alternative anti-cancer (non-MEK inhibitor) therapy, or death, or date of last follow up. PFS was defined as the time from the first day of study treatment, until the first documented progression of disease or death from any cause, whichever occurs first, or date of last follow up. Patients who discontinued cobimetinib, in the absence of progression, in order to receive an off-label MEK inhibitor were censored for DOR and PFS at the at the last follow up date. These patients were also considered to be continuing treatment for the purposes of calculating treatment duration exposure. FDG-PET and RECIST responses were investigator-assessed. All patients who received at least one dose of cobimetinib were included in both the efficacy and safety analysis set. All statistical analyses were performed with R, version 3.5.0 (http://www.R-project.org/)

Genomic Analysis

In patients with samples available for centralized testing, genomic analyses for MAPK pathway mutations was performed on DNA extracted from histiocyte tissue biopsies using a variety of assays, most commonly targeted exon sequencing using MSK-IMPACT or Heme-PACT[29,30]. Targeted RNA sequencing was also utilized for the purposes of detecting gene fusions using the Archer FusionPlex Custom Solid Panel[31]. Whole exome sequencing was also performed, based on DNA adequacy, using fingernails as germline control per previously described methods[8]. In some cases, different biopsies from the same individual were utilized for different genomic assays. Histiocytic neoplasms are routinely characterized by low tumor cellularity often resulting in low variant allele fractions for established driver mutations such as BRAF V600 [8]. As such, sequences from samples in which no MAPK pathway mutation was called using established pipelines developed and optimized for use in more cellular solid tumors were manually curated and high confidence mutations with lower read support salvaged.

Plasmids

To investigate the functional roles and the activation of oncogenic signaling pathways, we cloned the MAP2K2 Y134H, RAF1 K106N, and BRAF N486_T491delinsK mutations and expressed them in Ba/F3 cells. MSCV-based expression vectors with GFP and the full-length MAP2K2, RAF1, and BRAF wild type were used as controls. Mutational constructs were cloned into the MSCV-IRES-GFP backbone and checked by digestion and sequencing.

Western Blotting

Anti-phospho-p44/42 MAPK (ERK1/2) (Thr202/Tyr204) (no. 9101), anti-p44/42 MAPK (ERK1/2) (137F5) (no. 4695), anti-MEK1/2 (47E6) (no. 9126), anti-B-Raf (D9T6S) (no. 14814), anti-c-Raf (D4B3J) (no. 53745), as well as the secondary antibodies anti-rabbit IgG-HRP (no. 7076) and anti-mouse IgG-HRP (no. 7074) were purchased from Cell Signaling Technology. Anti-β-Actin (A5441) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich®. Cell lysates were prepared in RIPA buffer supplemented with Halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Scientific). Equal amounts of protein, as measured by the BRADFORD protein assay, were resolved in 4–12% Bis-Tris NuPage gradient gels (Life Technologies), and transferred electrophoretically on a polyvinylidene difluoride 0.45-m membrane. Membranes were blocked for 1 h at room temperature in 5% bovine serum albumin (BSA) in TBST before being incubated overnight at 4°C with the primary antibodies. All primary antibodies were diluted 1:1,000 in 5% BSA in TBST, except anti-β-actin, which was diluted 1:5,000 in 5% BSA in TBST. After three washes of 10 min in TBST, secondary antibodies were diluted 1:2,000 in 5% BSA in TBST and incubated for 1 h at room temperature. After another three washes in TBST, detection of the signal was achieved by incubating the membrane on an ECL solution from Millipore and exposure on autoradiography films from Denville Scientific (Metuchen, NJ, USA).

Drug Studies

Cobimetinib was purchased from Selleckchem. Drug studies were conducted in vitro using FACS-sorted, DAPI − eGFP + Ba/F3 cells that stably expressed the MIGII-EV, MIGII-MEK2Y134H, MIGII-RAF1 K106N and MIGII-BRAF N486_T491delinsK constructs using the CellTiter-Glo Luminescent Cell Viability Assay from Promega Corporation, according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The MIGII-MEK2 Y134H, MIGII-RAF1 K106N, and MIGII-BRAF N486_T491delinsK, FACS-sorted Ba/F3 cells were maintained in RPMI + 10% FBS + penicillin and streptomycin media without murine IL3. Meanwhile, MIGII-EV was maintained in RPMI + 10% FBS + penicillin and streptomycin with recombinant murine IL3 (1 ng/mL).

Data Availability

All datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study, including patient-level clinical data as well as all sequencing data have been deposited and are publicly available in the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics under the accession code ‘Histiocytosis Cobimetinib MSK, Nature 2019’ (http://www.cbioportal.org/study?id=histiocytosis_cobi_msk_2019).

Waterfall plot of maximum change in tumor size by RECIST following cobimetinib treatment in histiocytosis patients (n=14).

The upper and lower dotted lines represent cut-offs for progressive disease and partial response, respectively. Colors of bars indicate genomic alteration present. Notations above bars indicate specific mutation. One patient (asterisk) had prior BRAF inhibitor therapy that was discontinued due to intolerance. One patient (dagger) died due to underlying disease.

PET-Defined Duration of Response (N=16).

Depicts the duration of response according to PET criteria in the 16 responding patients, beginning with date of initial response.

Histopathology of histiocytoses with novel activating mutations in MEK2, RAF1, and BRAF treated on study.

(a) Protein diagram (top) and histological images (middle) demonstrating Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) with a MAP2K2 Y134H mutation. (b) Protein diagram (top) and histological images (middle) demonstrating non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis with a RAF1 K106N mutation. (c) Protein diagram (top) and histological images (middle) demonstrating ECD with a BRAF N486_T491delinsK mutation.

Study CONSORT diagram.

Shows the flow of patients through all phases of study participation from enrollment, follow-up, and data analysis. Demographic and Clinical Characteristics (N=18) Corticosteroids, anakinra, sirolimus, infliximab, intravenous immunoglobulin, rituximab. Methotrexate, cytarabine, cladribine, 6-mercaptopurine, vinblastine, lenolidamide, cyclophosphamide, etoposide. Vemurafenib, dasatinib. Overall Response Rate Demonstrates the overall response rate, and best response (complete, partial, stable, progressive, non-evaluable) using both PET response criteria and RECIST version 1.1 criteria. Safety of cobimetinib in phase 2 study in histiocytosis patients Adverse events listed here are those that were attributed by investigators as related to cobimetinib and occurred in at least 15% of patients, regardless of grade, or of any frequency, for grade ≥3. Combines the following terms: Rash acneiform, rash maculo-papular. Combines the following terms: bladder infection, bronchial infection, oral infection, tooth infection, upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infection, infections - other. Safety, Regardless of Attribution Adverse events listed here are those that occurred in at least 15% of patients, regardless of grade or investigator attribution. Infection combines the following terms: bladder infection, bronchial infection, oral infection, tooth infection, upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infection, infections and infestations - other. Rash combines: rash acneiform, rash maculo-papular. Genomic Testing Methodology ECD: Erdheim-Chester disease; LCH: Langerhans cell histiocytosis; RDD: Rosai-Dorfman disease; CR: complete response; PR: partial response; SD: stable disease; TES: Targeted Exon Sequencing; TRS: Targeted RNA Sequencing; cfDNA: Cell-Free DNA; PCR; polymerase chain reaction; WES: Whole Exome Sequencing; NE: Not-Evaluable; NA: Not Applicable
  31 in total

1.  Recurrent RAS and PIK3CA mutations in Erdheim-Chester disease.

Authors:  Jean-François Emile; Eli L Diamond; Zofia Hélias-Rodzewicz; Fleur Cohen-Aubart; Frédéric Charlotte; David M Hyman; Eunhee Kim; Raajit Rampal; Minal Patel; Chezi Ganzel; Shlomzion Aumann; Gladwys Faucher; Catherine Le Gall; Karen Leroy; Magali Colombat; Jean-Emmanuel Kahn; Salim Trad; Philippe Nizard; Jean Donadieu; Valérie Taly; Zahir Amoura; Omar Abdel-Wahab; Julien Haroche
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2014-08-22       Impact factor: 22.113

2.  How I treat Langerhans cell histiocytosis.

Authors:  Carl E Allen; Stephan Ladisch; Kenneth L McClain
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 22.113

3.  Genomic analysis of hairy cell leukemia identifies novel recurrent genetic alterations.

Authors:  Benjamin H Durham; Bartlomiej Getta; Sascha Dietrich; Justin Taylor; Helen Won; James M Bogenberger; Sasinya Scott; Eunhee Kim; Young Rock Chung; Stephen S Chung; Jennifer Hüllein; Tatjana Walther; Lu Wang; Sydney X Lu; Christopher C Oakes; Raoul Tibes; Torsten Haferlach; Barry S Taylor; Martin S Tallman; Michael F Berger; Jae H Park; Thorsten Zenz; Omar Abdel-Wahab
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 22.113

4.  High prevalence of somatic MAP2K1 mutations in BRAF V600E-negative Langerhans cell histiocytosis.

Authors:  Noah A Brown; Larissa V Furtado; Bryan L Betz; Mark J Kiel; Helmut C Weigelin; Megan S Lim; Kojo S J Elenitoba-Johnson
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2014-06-30       Impact factor: 22.113

5.  BRAF mutation predicts sensitivity to MEK inhibition.

Authors:  David B Solit; Levi A Garraway; Christine A Pratilas; Ayana Sawai; Gad Getz; Andrea Basso; Qing Ye; Jose M Lobo; Yuhong She; Iman Osman; Todd R Golub; Judith Sebolt-Leopold; William R Sellers; Neal Rosen
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-11-06       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 6.  Consensus recommendations for the diagnosis and clinical management of Rosai-Dorfman-Destombes disease.

Authors:  Oussama Abla; Eric Jacobsen; Jennifer Picarsic; Zdenka Krenova; Ronald Jaffe; Jean-Francois Emile; Benjamin H Durham; Jorge Braier; Frédéric Charlotte; Jean Donadieu; Fleur Cohen-Aubart; Carlos Rodriguez-Galindo; Carl Allen; James A Whitlock; Sheila Weitzman; Kenneth L McClain; Julien Haroche; Eli L Diamond
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 22.113

7.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

Authors:  E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.162

8.  Diverse and Targetable Kinase Alterations Drive Histiocytic Neoplasms.

Authors:  Eli L Diamond; Benjamin H Durham; Julien Haroche; Zhan Yao; Jing Ma; Sameer A Parikh; Zhaoming Wang; John Choi; Eunhee Kim; Fleur Cohen-Aubart; Stanley Chun-Wei Lee; Yijun Gao; Jean-Baptiste Micol; Patrick Campbell; Michael P Walsh; Brooke Sylvester; Igor Dolgalev; Olga Aminova; Adriana Heguy; Paul Zappile; Joy Nakitandwe; Chezi Ganzel; James D Dalton; David W Ellison; Juvianee Estrada-Veras; Mario Lacouture; William A Gahl; Philip J Stephens; Vincent A Miller; Jeffrey S Ross; Siraj M Ali; Samuel R Briggs; Omotayo Fasan; Jared Block; Sebastien Héritier; Jean Donadieu; David B Solit; David M Hyman; José Baselga; Filip Janku; Barry S Taylor; Christopher Y Park; Zahir Amoura; Ahmet Dogan; Jean-Francois Emile; Neal Rosen; Tanja A Gruber; Omar Abdel-Wahab
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 39.397

9.  Mutually exclusive recurrent somatic mutations in MAP2K1 and BRAF support a central role for ERK activation in LCH pathogenesis.

Authors:  Rikhia Chakraborty; Oliver A Hampton; Xiaoyun Shen; Stephen J Simko; Albert Shih; Harshal Abhyankar; Karen Phaik Har Lim; Kyle R Covington; Lisa Trevino; Ninad Dewal; Donna M Muzny; Harshavardhan Doddapaneni; Jianhong Hu; Linghua Wang; Philip J Lupo; M John Hicks; Diana L Bonilla; Karen C Dwyer; Marie-Luise Berres; Poulikos I Poulikakos; Miriam Merad; Kenneth L McClain; David A Wheeler; Carl E Allen; D Williams Parsons
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2014-09-08       Impact factor: 22.113

10.  Vemurafenib for BRAF V600-Mutant Erdheim-Chester Disease and Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis: Analysis of Data From the Histology-Independent, Phase 2, Open-label VE-BASKET Study.

Authors:  Eli L Diamond; Vivek Subbiah; A Craig Lockhart; Jean-Yves Blay; Igor Puzanov; Ian Chau; Noopur S Raje; Jurgen Wolf; Joseph P Erinjeri; Jean Torrisi; Mario Lacouture; Elena Elez; Ferran Martínez-Valle; Benjamin Durham; Maria E Arcila; Gary Ulaner; Omar Abdel-Wahab; Bethany Pitcher; Martina Makrutzki; Todd Riehl; José Baselga; David M Hyman
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 31.777

View more
  62 in total

Review 1.  Update on the classification of T-cell lymphomas, Hodgkin lymphomas, and histiocytic/dendritic cell neoplasms.

Authors:  Akira Satou; N Nora Bennani; Andrew L Feldman
Journal:  Expert Rev Hematol       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 2.929

2.  Identification of Novel Fusion Transcripts in Undifferentiated Pleomorphic Sarcomas by Transcriptome Sequencing.

Authors:  Biqiang Zheng; Shuirong Zhang; Weiluo Cai; Jian Wang; Ting Wang; Ning Tang; Yingqiang Shi; Xiaoying Luo; Wangjun Yan
Journal:  Cancer Genomics Proteomics       Date:  2019 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.069

Review 3.  Erdheim-Chester disease: a rapidly evolving disease model.

Authors:  Francesco Pegoraro; Matthias Papo; Valerio Maniscalco; Frédéric Charlotte; Julien Haroche; Augusto Vaglio
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 11.528

4.  Leveraging Systematic Functional Analysis to Benchmark an In Silico Framework Distinguishes Driver from Passenger MEK Mutants in Cancer.

Authors:  Aphrothiti J Hanrahan; Brooke E Sylvester; Matthew T Chang; Arijh Elzein; Jianjiong Gao; Weiwei Han; Ye Liu; Dong Xu; Sizhi P Gao; Alexander N Gorelick; Alexis M Jones; Amber J Kiliti; Moriah H Nissan; Clare A Nimura; Abigail N Poteshman; Zhan Yao; Yijun Gao; Wenhuo Hu; Hannah C Wise; Elena I Gavrila; Alexander N Shoushtari; Shakuntala Tiwari; Agnes Viale; Omar Abdel-Wahab; Taha Merghoub; Michael F Berger; Neal Rosen; Barry S Taylor; David B Solit
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 12.701

5.  Rosai-Dorfman Disease-Utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT for Initial Evaluation and Follow-up.

Authors:  Sonia Mahajan; Reiko Nakajima; Mariko Yabe; Ahmet Dogan; Gary A Ulaner; Joachim Yahalom; Ariela Noy; Eli L Diamond; Heiko Schöder
Journal:  Clin Nucl Med       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 7.794

Review 6.  Erdheim-Chester Disease: a Concise Review.

Authors:  Matthias Papo; Jean-François Emile; Thiago Trovati Maciel; Pierre Bay; Alistair Baber; Olivier Hermine; Zahir Amoura; Julien Haroche
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 4.592

7.  Histiocytic disorders: insights into novel biology and implications for therapy of Langerhans cell histiocytosis and Erdheim-Chester disease.

Authors:  Kenneth McClain
Journal:  Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program       Date:  2020-12-04

8.  Neurologic and oncologic features of Erdheim-Chester disease: a 30-patient series.

Authors:  Ankush Bhatia; Vaios Hatzoglou; Gary Ulaner; Raajit Rampal; David M Hyman; Omar Abdel-Wahab; Benjamin H Durham; Ahmet Dogan; Neval Ozkaya; Mariko Yabe; Kseniya Petrova-Drus; Katherine S Panageas; Anne Reiner; Marc Rosenblum; Eli L Diamond
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 12.300

9.  Mutant SF3B1 promotes AKT- and NF-κB-driven mammary tumorigenesis.

Authors:  Bo Liu; Zhaoqi Liu; Sisi Chen; Michelle Ki; Caroline Erickson; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Benjamin H Durham; Qing Chang; Elisa de Stanchina; Yiwei Sun; Raul Rabadan; Omar Abdel-Wahab; Sarat Chandarlapaty
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 14.808

Review 10.  MAP-Kinase-Driven Hematopoietic Neoplasms: A Decade of Progress in the Molecular Age.

Authors:  Rikhia Chakraborty; Omar Abdel-Wahab; Benjamin H Durham
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 6.915

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.